Responsibility Infrastructure Protocol.
A technical working proposal describing relationships between responsibility records, evidence, verification, recognition, standing and reliance.
- Scope
- Wider RI protocol architecture
- Relationship
- Part of the RI-originated working corpus
- Interoperability
- Uses a separately defined public interoperability layer
- Technology model
- Implementation-neutral at the normative boundary
The protocol is broader than interoperable exchange.
The Responsibility Infrastructure Protocol describes the protocol-level relationships through which responsibility information can move from recorded facts and evidence to verified claims, recognised standing, resolution and external reliance.
A separate working document examines how responsibility information can be exchanged between independent parties.
Separate functions before connecting them.
Responsibility Infrastructure treats recording, verification, recognition, standing, registry, resolution and reliance as distinguishable functions. A record may exist without being verified; verification does not itself create recognition; historical recognition is not automatically current standing; and resolved standing does not remove the relying party's own authority or judgement.
- Responsibility record
- Preserves the responsibility facts and material lifecycle events relevant to a claim.
- Verification
- Determines what the available evidence supports without collapsing evidence into recognition.
- Recognition
- Determines the effect of a verified responsibility record within an applicable recognition regime.
- Standing
- Expresses the current condition that a relying party may need to resolve at the point of reliance.
- Registry
- Preserves and publishes recognised standing and its history where the applicable regime requires it.
- Resolution
- Determines which current standing corresponds to a particular reliance request.
- Reliance
- Allows an external party or system to use resolved standing within its own authority and decision context.
Standard and Protocol perform different jobs.
RI publications identify their applicable requirements and scope. Independent exchange is assessed against the requirements published for that exchange.
A claim of conformance must identify the applicable publication, role, scope and version. Compatibility with the public interoperability layer does not by itself establish conformance with the wider RI Standard or Protocol.
Shared exchange requirements.
RI working proposals examine the minimum responsibility information and exchange behaviour that independent parties may need.
Published shared requirements should be identifiable, testable and independently implementable.