6. Profile 2: Extended Taxonomy Controls

Purpose: Determine whether governed business meaning and classification are anchored to the physical data estate as required by the applicable controls for decision-scope use. Extended Taxonomy Controls apply when concepts, classifications, labels, identifiers, semantic grain, or physical representations materially affect the decision path.

ET-001: Taxonomy Scope and Purpose Are Declared

Prerequisites: Pass required: CORE-004.

Requirement: Each Extended Taxonomy evaluation shall declare the taxonomy scope and purpose for the stated decision scope.

Pass: The record identifies the taxonomy scope, purpose, owner, version, applicable decision scope, and excluded meanings.

Fail: Taxonomy scope or purpose is missing, ambiguous, or not linked to the decision scope.

Evidence required: Taxonomy scope record, purpose statement, owner, version, applicable decision-scope mapping, and excluded meanings.

Rationale: Classification cannot be tested if its scope and purpose are not declared.

Application guidance (informative): Record which business meanings the taxonomy covers for this decision and which meanings it excludes.

ET-002: Ownership and Stewardship Are Recorded

Prerequisites: Pass required: ET-001.

Requirement: Each material taxonomy node shall record business ownership or stewardship authority.

Pass: Owner or steward, authority scope, approval responsibility, and review condition are recorded.

Fail: A material concept or classification lacks authority for approval, change, or dispute resolution.

Evidence required: Owner or steward record, authority scope, approval responsibility, and review condition.

Rationale: Accountability requires a recorded authority.

Application guidance (informative): Locate the person or function authorized to approve, change, and resolve disputes about each material taxonomy node.

ET-003: Taxonomy Node Type Is Declared

Prerequisites: Pass required: ET-002.

Requirement: Each material taxonomy node shall declare its node type.

Pass: Each node is identified as concept, category, domain, subdomain, classification, label, alias, deprecated term, code set, identifier concept, or other approved node type.

Fail: A material node lacks a declared type or uses an unapproved type.

Evidence required: Taxonomy node record, node type list, approval record.

Rationale: Node type controls how the node may be interpreted and used.

Application guidance (informative): Inspect each material node type and confirm that the approved type list permits that type.

ET-004: Business Meaning Is Recorded

Prerequisites: Pass required: ET-003.

Requirement: Each material taxonomy node shall have recorded business meaning.

Pass: The record includes approved definition, semantic boundary, owner, version, and decision-scope applicability.

Fail: Meaning is missing, ambiguous, only technical, only local, or not approved for the decision scope.

Evidence required: Definition record, semantic boundary, owner/steward approval, version, decision-scope mapping.

Rationale: Labels alone do not establish governed business meaning or readiness for decision use.

Application guidance (informative): Read each material definition with its boundary and approval. Check that it expresses business meaning for this scope, rather than only a technical label.

ET-005: Controlled Label and Language Evidence Are Recorded

Prerequisites: Pass required: ET-004.

Requirement: Each material concept or classification shall record authoritative labels and non-authoritative variants.

Pass: The record identifies the preferred label and records permitted synonyms, aliases, deprecated terms, and local variants. Record prohibited labels where applicable. If a required category has no entries, record that fact rather than inventing a label or leaving an unexplained gap.

Fail: The decision path depends on labels that are unapproved, ambiguous, deprecated, or not linked to an approved concept.

Evidence required: Preferred-label record; permitted synonyms, aliases, deprecated terms, and local variants, including explicit no-entry statements where appropriate; prohibited labels where applicable; and approval record.

Rationale: Controlled language reduces semantic ambiguity across systems and decision paths.

Application guidance (informative): Compare labels used in the decision with the governed preferred label, variants, and prohibited terms. Record empty categories explicitly where appropriate.

ET-006: Semantic Domain and Boundary Are Declared

Prerequisites: Pass required: ET-004.

Requirement: Each material concept or classification shall declare its semantic domain and boundary.

Pass: The record states domain, boundary rules, included meanings, excluded meanings, and overlap/disjointness rules where material.

Fail: Domain or boundary is missing where the distinction affects decision use.

Evidence required: Semantic domain, included and excluded meanings, boundary rules, and material overlap/disjointness rules with decision-scope mapping.

Rationale: The enterprise must know where one meaning ends and another begins.

Application guidance (informative): Check included and excluded meanings and any material overlap rules. Confirm which business domain governs the concept for this use.

ET-007: Semantic Grain Is Declared Where Material

Prerequisites: Pass required: ET-006.

Requirement: Each material concept, identifier, classification, count, integration point, aggregation, or transformation shall declare semantic grain wherever it affects interpretation or use in the decision path. Each material transition between grains shall declare the source grain, transformation or aggregation rule, and resulting grain.

Pass: The record states the business level at which each material concept, identifier, classification, or count is unique, meaningful, counted, integrated, aggregated, or compared at its point of use. Every material grain transition is explicitly recorded with its governing transformation or aggregation rule.

Fail: Different grains are treated as equivalent without a declared and approved transformation or equivalence rule, a material grain transition is implicit, or the grain at a point of consumption cannot be reconstructed.

Evidence required: Semantic grain records by point of use, decision-scope mapping, source-grain and resulting-grain records, transformation or aggregation rule for each material grain transition, and Equivalence Rule where distinct grains are treated as comparable.

Rationale: Same names do not guarantee the same grain or meaning. A decision path may legitimately use multiple grains, but every material grain and transition must be explicit and reconstructable.

Application guidance (informative): Inspect where concepts and counts are interpreted, joined, or aggregated. Trace each material change in business grain through its recorded rule.

ET-008: Provenance Is Recorded

Prerequisites: Pass required: ET-002.

Requirement: Each material taxonomy assertion shall record provenance.

Pass: The record identifies the source of the assertion, approving authority or approved rule reference, version, timestamp or effective period, and decision-scope applicability.

Fail: Material meaning, label, classification, identifier, or boundary evidence lacks provenance.

Evidence required: Provenance record, responsible authority or approved rule reference, version, effective date or timestamp.

Rationale: Decision readiness depends on knowing where meaning came from and when it was valid.

Application guidance (informative): Trace each material taxonomy assertion to its source, approving authority, version, and time of validity.

ET-009: Physical Semantic Anchors Are Recorded Where Required

Prerequisites: Pass required: CORE-005, ET-007, ET-008.

Requirement: Each material concept or classification shall record physical semantic anchors when physical representation affects the decision scope.

Pass: The record identifies source systems and physical representations such as tables, fields, files, messages, events, APIs, documents, code sets, or equivalent evidence objects required by the scope.

Fail: A material concept is treated as ready for decision use without required physical representation evidence.

Evidence required: Source-system reference, physical attribute/object reference, data asset reference, code-set or reference-data evidence where applicable.

Rationale: The Extended Taxonomy closes the gap between governed meaning and real-world data.

Application guidance (informative): Locate the source objects that physically represent a material concept. Confirm that the references identify the evidence required for this scope.

ET-010: Source-System Representation Is Recorded Where Required

Prerequisites: Pass required: ET-009.

Requirement: Each material concept shall identify source-system representations required for the decision scope.

Pass: The record identifies source systems, local terms, local attributes, local codes, and representation differences required to test the decision scope.

Fail: The concept is treated as ready for stated use without the source-system representation needed to support the decision path.

Evidence required: Source-system mapping, local term/attribute mapping, source representation notes, decision-scope mapping.

Rationale: A single governed concept may be represented differently across source systems.

Application guidance (informative): Compare each required source-system representation with the governed concept, including local terms, fields, codes, and material differences.

ET-011: Business Identifier or Key Evidence Is Recorded Where Applicable

Prerequisites: Pass required: ET-007, ET-008.

Requirement: Where a concept is represented by identifiers or keys, the Extended Taxonomy shall record identifier meaning and approved key evidence for the decision scope.

Pass: Each material identifier records business meaning, semantic grain, source-system representation, value-format expectation where material, and authority or resolution rule.

Fail: Identifier fields or keys are treated as equivalent by name alone or without required evidence.

Evidence required: Identifier record, source-key mapping, semantic grain record, material value-format exception where present, and authority or resolution rule.

Rationale: Business keys often differ by system even when they appear semantically similar.

Application guidance (informative): Check what each identifier means, the instance and grain it identifies, its source representation, and the authority or resolution rule behind it.

ET-012: Resolution or Mastering Rule Is Recorded Where Applicable

Prerequisites: Pass required: ET-011.

Requirement: Where multiple source representations or identifiers must be treated as the same concept or instance, the resolution or mastering rule shall be recorded.

Pass: The record includes approved rule, authority, threshold where applicable, exception handling, and decision-scope applicability.

Fail: Source representations are merged, counted, mastered, or treated as equivalent without an approved rule.

Evidence required: The resolution or mastering rule used, authority record, threshold record where applicable, exception-handling rule, and exception record when an exception exists.

Rationale: Integration requires tested equivalence, not assumed equivalence.

Application guidance (informative): Inspect the recorded rule before treating different source representations as the same concept or business instance.

ET-013: Governance Constraints, Jurisdiction, and Usage Boundaries Are Recorded

Prerequisites: Pass required: ET-004.

Requirement: Each governed taxonomy scope shall record applicable usage boundaries, policy constraints, and jurisdictional authorities. When two applicable authoritative constraints conflict, a recorded precedence or adjudication rule shall resolve the conflict before material use.

Pass: Applicable constraints and jurisdictions are identified. Each constraint has authority, scope, version/effective period, and permitted/prohibited use. Each conflict is resolved by a pre-recorded jurisdictional precedence/adjudication rule or an explicit competent-authority decision. If no valid resolution exists, the control does not Pass.

Fail: Constraints conflict without a valid precedence/adjudication rule, authority is unclear, or material use proceeds despite unresolved mutually exclusive requirements.

Evidence required: Applicable constraint/policy records, jurisdiction and authority references, version/effective period, permitted/prohibited use, and any required precedence/adjudication rule. Include conflict and competent-authority resolution records when a conflict exists.

Rationale: Conflicting authority cannot be converted into permission by assessor judgment. An unresolved legal or policy conflict is a control failure and normally requires a Stop Gate state.

Application guidance (informative): Identify the constraints and jurisdictions governing use. Resolve actual conflicts through recorded competent authority before material reliance.

ET-014: Semantic Risk Is Recorded Where Present

Prerequisites: Recorded result required: ET-004, ET-013.

Requirement: Semantic risk shall be recorded when ambiguity, conflict, overlap, deprecated meaning, local variation, or known misuse may affect the decision scope.

Pass: Each material semantic risk has a risk description, affected scope, readiness disposition, owner, and remediation or exception record.

Fail: Known semantic risk affects the decision scope and is not recorded.

Evidence required: Semantic risk record, owner, readiness disposition, remediation or exception record.

Rationale: Unrecorded semantic risk can become hidden decision risk.

Application guidance (informative): Locate known semantic risks affecting this decision. Check their owners, recorded disposition, and remediation or exception references.

ET-015: Relationship Seeds Are Not Treated as Decision-Ready Relationships

Prerequisites: Recorded result required: ET-004, ET-008, ET-013.

Requirement: Each relationship seed discovered during taxonomy work shall be preserved in a Relationship Candidate Record. Material use shall follow the applicable recorded Gate disposition and its authority and constraints.

Pass: Each relationship seed has a stable relationship-candidate identifier, source and provenance, discovery method, decision-scope reference, and current readiness state. When the Materiality Rule requires ontology review, the seed also has an Extended Ontology review reference that preserves the same candidate identifier.

Fail: A relationship seed is relied on as a ready relationship before required Extended Ontology evaluation, or a required seed-to-ontology evidence link cannot be traced by the same relationship-candidate identifier.

Evidence required: Relationship Candidate Record, stable relationship-candidate identifier, source/provenance, discovery method, decision-scope reference, readiness state, Extended Ontology review reference when required, Gate Record, and exception record where applicable.

Rationale: Taxonomy can expose possible relationships; ontology controls determine whether relationship use is defensible.

Application guidance (informative): Preserve a discovered relationship as a candidate. If ontology review is required, follow the same candidate identifier into that review.

ET-016: Readiness State Is Declared

Prerequisites: Recorded result required: ET-013, ET-014, ET-015.

Requirement: Each material taxonomy node used in a decision path shall have a recorded readiness state for the decision scope.

Pass: The node is assigned Proceed, Caution, Stop, or Quarantined with reason, responsible authority or approved rule reference, timestamp, and review condition where required.

Fail: A material node is used without a readiness state or the state is unsupported by evidence.

Evidence required: Readiness state record, Gate Record, reason, responsible authority or approved rule reference, timestamp, review condition.

Rationale: Governed meaning must have a decision-scope disposition.

Application guidance (informative): Inspect the Gate evidence supporting the node readiness state for this scope; a taxonomy approval alone is not a readiness determination.

ET-017: Taxonomy Change Triggers Reassessment

Prerequisites: Pass required: CORE-023, ET-002. Recorded result required: ET-016.

Requirement: Each material Extended Taxonomy change shall trigger impact assessment for active or prospective decision scopes that rely on the changed artifact. Historical Gate and Conformance Records remain fixed to the taxonomy version that governed them.

Pass: A material taxonomy change is versioned, and affected active or prospective scopes are identified. Prior readiness for new reliance is invalidated or reassessed as defined. Any new Gate Record or Conformance Record is linked to the prior record without rewriting it.

Fail: Future reliance continues under a materially changed taxonomy without reassessment, or historical records are retroactively recalculated or overwritten merely because the taxonomy changed.

Evidence required: Taxonomy change/version record, impact rule, affected-scope list, readiness invalidation/reassessment record, new Gate/Conformance Record where required, and immutable historical references.

Rationale: Meaning changes can invalidate evidence previously ready for stated use.

Application guidance (informative): Follow a material taxonomy change into impact review and reassessment for future use. Retain the earlier assessment under its original version.