# Responsibility Infrastructure implementation-claim language guide

**Status:** Non-normative reference material  
**Version:** 0.1-reference

This guide explains how organisations may describe implementation work without overstating authority, verification, Recognition, certification, accreditation, or Registry standing.

The issued Responsibility Infrastructure publications remain the normative source.

## Current programme status

External conformance assessment, accreditation, Recognition, and Registry intake are not presently open.

No organisation should currently claim that it is:

- certified by Responsibility Infrastructure;
- accredited by La Touche Academy Ltd;
- approved by the Responsibility Infrastructure Registry;
- officially recognised as RI-conforming;
- independently ratified under the Responsibility Infrastructure category;
- registered, unless a valid public Registry Entry actually exists.

## Claim stages

### 1. Mapped

**Meaning:** The implementation identifies the named publications and clauses it claims to support.

**Permitted wording:**

> Mapped to RI-STD-01 clauses 5–12 and RI-004 sections 3.1–3.4.

**Not permitted:**

> RI compliant.  
> RI certified.  
> Official RI implementation.

Mapping is a self-declared relationship. It does not prove that the implementation satisfies the mapped requirements.

### 2. Evidence Submitted

**Meaning:** Evidence has been supplied against the declared mapping, but no independent determination has been made.

**Permitted wording:**

> Evidence submitted against RI-STD-01 clauses 5–12.

The claim should identify:

- the submitting organisation;
- the implementation and version;
- the named publications and clauses;
- the submitted evidence;
- known limitations;
- unresolved matters.

### 3. Independently Verified

**Meaning:** A sufficiently separated evaluator has assessed the evidence against defined criteria and issued a Verification Report.

**Permitted wording:**

> Independently verified against RI-STD-01 clauses 5–12 by [evaluator], subject to the limitations recorded in [Verification Report].

The claim must identify:

- the evaluator;
- the evaluator's authority and role;
- the criteria used;
- the Verification Report;
- the determination;
- limitations, exclusions, and unresolved matters;
- any financial, ownership, or operational relationship between the evaluator and the implementation operator.

Independent verification does not itself create Recognition or Registry standing.

### 4. Recognised

**Meaning:** A properly constituted recognition authority has accepted, rejected, or qualified a verified claim through a Recognition Decision.

**Permitted wording:**

> Recognised for [defined scope] under Recognition Decision [identifier].

Recognition must not exceed the scope stated in the Recognition Decision.

### 5. Registered

**Meaning:** The recognised standing has been published as a current Registry Entry.

**Permitted wording:**

> Registered standing: [Registry Entry identifier].

The claim must link to the public Registry Entry and state its current status.

## Functional mapping of execution layers

A tool may map to one or more Responsibility Infrastructure functions, including:

- Capture and Assignment;
- Acknowledgement and Response State;
- Boundary Control;
- Action and State Transition;
- Evidence;
- Verification;
- Receipt;
- Registry Interface.

Permitted wording:

> [Tool] implements a Boundary Control function mapped to RI-STD-01 and related evidence requirements.

Not permitted without the relevant evidence and standing:

> [Tool] is an official Responsibility Infrastructure module.  
> [Tool] is approved by the Responsibility Infrastructure Registry.  
> [Tool] is the recognised execution layer for Responsibility Infrastructure.

Functional mapping does not create endorsement, exclusivity, certification, Recognition, or Registry standing.

## Prohibited compression

The following conditions must not be collapsed into a single claim of “RI compliance”:

1. mapping;
2. evidence submission;
3. independent verification;
4. Recognition;
5. Registry publication.

Each condition has a different evidential and institutional meaning.

## Institutional separation

The intended separation is:

- **La Touche Academy Ltd:** publishes requirements and reference materials;
- **implementation operator:** builds and operates the implementation;
- **evidence submitter:** supplies evidence supporting the claim;
- **independent evaluator:** assesses evidence against defined criteria;
- **recognition authority:** issues the Recognition Decision;
- **Responsibility Infrastructure Registry:** publishes recognised standing after procedural requirements are satisfied.

The Registry records standing. It should not replace the independent assessment or Recognition process that produced that standing.

## Core rule

> La Touche defines the conditions. Independent evidence determines whether they have been met. The Registry preserves the recognised result.