Day 30: reading the results
You hold your own records, the formats written from them, and the numbers that price the present way. Then you decide, and you keep everything either way.
What you hold at day 30
- The composed model and its package, identified by its schema's SHA-256.
- Validated Governed Data Records from one of your own sources, in your own storage.
- The same records written as UBL, UN/EDIFACT or OMOP, each with its coverage report.
- The mapping files, versioned and bound to the model and format versions they were written for.
- A hash-chained mapping log, and Receipts for the decisions you settled.
- If you ran it, the governance track's Receipt corpus.
The questions the evaluation answers
1. Did your data validate, and where did it not?
The share of records valid, valid with Exceptional Values, and refused, with every refusal's reason. The Exceptional Values tell you where your source holds values that fail their own definitions, and why: refused, not asked, masked, invalid. That is a data-quality finding you get on day one, stated per value rather than guessed.
2. What does the present way cost you, per format?
For each format, the share of values placed by lookup, by a declared rule, carried as text, and not representable. The declared share is the mapping work your organization does today and redoes at every change of rule, profile or standard. Multiply it by the number of partners and formats you maintain, and you have the recurring cost of the present way, measured on your own data.
3. What could each format not say?
sdc-map fidelity prints one row per Exceptional Value and one column per format: preserved, degraded, carried or lost. In most exchange formats a refusal, an unasked question, a masked field and a failed value all become the same empty element. Your Governed Data Records keep the difference; the table shows how much of it each format keeps, and credits the formats that keep it well.
4. Governance track: where were the gaps?
If you ran it: the decisions with complete provenance, the ones with gaps (missing ProvGov fields, INDETERMINATE outcomes, unchecked dimensions, hash mismatches), and the DENY rules that fired, which tell you what structural enforcement would have stopped.
The decision, with evidence
Grow from the source you proved
Add sources and formats on the same model, onboard partners with the mapping files you already wrote, and move decision flows from observation to enforcement where the governance track found gaps.
An organization account puts the work on an invoice against a purchase order, under an order form.
Keep everything
The model, the records, the outputs, the reports and the Receipts are yours, in open formats, checkable with Apache 2.0 tools that do not need us.
Nothing you produced depends on Axius SDC staying in business to stay readable.
The horizon the numbers point to
Today's formats will keep changing, and partners will keep asking for them; the mappers write them, and the reports say what each one costs. The declared count is what that costs you to maintain.
The direction the Semantic Data Charter was built toward is the record itself as the unit of exchange. When partners exchange Governed Data Records, the application's data model and the exchange format are the same thing: no loss of fidelity between them, no mapping to maintain, and every record verifiable by whoever receives it. The evaluation measures how far your own data is from that, starting with one source.
Bring your day-30 numbers
We will scope the next sources, formats and flows from your own measurements.
contact@axius-sdc.com