I tiakina i:
| Kaituhi matua: | |
|---|---|
| Hōputu: | Recurso digital |
| Reo: | |
| I whakaputaina: |
Zenodo
2026
|
| Ngā marau: | |
| Urunga tuihono: | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.20029208 |
| Ngā Tūtohu: |
Tāpirihia he Tūtohu
Kāore He Tūtohu, Me noho koe te mea tuatahi ki te tūtohu i tēnei pūkete!
|
Rārangi ihirangi:
- <p>Abstract<br>The CKS pattern's path-retraceability commitment requires substrate content to carry sufficient provenance<br>that decisions can be answered from substrate alone — what was decided, by whom, under what authority,<br>with what rationale. A separate set of derivation notes formalizes the four accountability questions; this note<br>formalizes the substrate-side metadata infrastructure that supports them. Six fields constitute the<br>commitment: three unconditional (writer attribution, timestamp, antecedent reference) required for every<br>substrate write produced by deployment activity, and three conditional (rule reference, rationale, relationship<br>to contradicting content) required when their architectural conditions hold. The conditional structure is itself<br>part of the commitment: implementations that flatten it — treating all six as universally required, or treating<br>any of the conditions as deployment-configurable — fail the commitment in the architectural sense even<br>when their nominal field coverage is broader. The note defines each field, articulates the conditional<br>structure as architectural rather than operational, distinguishes the commitment from four adjacent<br>provenance patterns, names the load-bearing connections to downstream commitments, enumerates nine<br>failure modes, and provides an operational test.</p>