Key idea & worked example
Conformance means meeting a specified contract. Different checks address parsing, structure, relationships, required capabilities and file identity.
Validation and scientific assessment complement one another; each needs an explicitly stated scope.See the worked example →On this page
- ExplainSubject · source · scopeA short account of what the package or graph means.bind the account to artifacts
- VerifyVersions · files · checksExact artifacts and reproducible technical outcomes.give the next person a route
- Hand overTerms · limits · next stepsCredit, reuse instructions and unresolved questions.
1. Check the handover before making a release claim
| Question | What the next researcher should receive |
|---|---|
| What does this represent? | An identified subject and any state, configuration or context that qualifies the account. |
| Which exact release did you use? | The VAO standard and ontology versions, plus the object or dataset content version and immutable source references. |
| Which bytes did you use? | Exact realization and carrier identities, byte sizes and digests, with a clear distinction between originals and derivatives. |
| Why is a statement present? | Its attributable assertion, source fragment, method, generating activity, review status and unresolved qualifications. |
| What can the receiving client do? | Declared capabilities, required profiles, complete groups and dependencies; a report of unavailable or unsupported operations. |
| How may the resources be reused? | Creators, attribution, resource-specific reuse terms, source links and documented changes. |
| How can a result be reproduced? | Input identities, commands, tool versions, check results and checks that were not run. |
2. Run checks in an order that makes failures understandable
- Structure & meaningParsing · schema · relationsCheck the record against its declared version and profiles.then verify the artifact
- Exact artifactsBytes · bindings · closureVerify the files, carrier mappings and required members.then assess the scope
- InterpretationSource review & capability testsAssess the claim and the operation you actually support.
For a VAO, validate the workspace, pack to a new output, and validate the produced carrierCarrierA package or workspace that contains a manifest, carrier mapping and selected realizations. Bootstrap, preservation-closure and custom carriers serve different delivery purposes.Work through the Cuntz example →. Check release bindings with the actual release descriptor, not an unrelated example descriptor. Check dependency closureDependency closureThe complete set of prerequisites for a selected task, obtained by following every required dependency. It can be smaller than the whole preservation package.Follow a model and its dependencies → for the groups needed by your intended operation. For an RDFRDFA graph data model: statements connect a subject to an object through an identified relationship. For Cuntz, an observation can point to the pipe it describes and the evidence it uses.Follow a Cuntz observation through the graph → graph, load the pinned ontology hierarchy and shapes. The tutorial helper checks exchange data; publication and application profiles may require further records.
How can a file pass validation but support a limited conclusion?
Conformance means meeting a specified contract. Different checks address parsing, structure, relationships, required capabilities and file identity.
- ContractVersion + profilesIdentify which requirements were checked.run the relevant checks
- Technical checksRecorded outcomesParsing, relationships, fixity and other claimed layers.interpret their limits
- Research judgmentEvidence & interpretationReview what the result can support.
Work through the example 3 STEPS
Take the published observation with value 1281 millimetres. A reader wants to know both whether its record is valid and whether the measurement answers a question about the pipe.
Check the structure
A schema can check that the result has the required form and that a numerical field contains a number. Semantic checks can verify that references point to appropriate records.
Check the evidence links
Resolve the pipe, measurement activity and workbook realization; verify the cited source bytes. These operations establish what the record says and which source it identifies.
Assess fitness for the question
The workbook timestamp still is not the measurement-session date. A valid record without a documented calibration uncertainty cannot support an uncertainty claim simply because its schema passed.
- Cuntz Positiv · VAO 0.5.0-rc.2 ↗
Published manifest: identities, measurement observations, realization digests, profiles and rights. Exact examples checked against this release.
- VAO Standard 0.5.0 ↗
The standard contract is separate from the Cuntz dataset content version 0.5.0-rc.2.
The notebook’s JSON teaching excerpt is deliberately incomplete and is not presented as a complete, independently conforming VAO package.
The useful distinction. Validation and scientific assessment complement one another; each needs an explicitly stated scope.
3. Use a failure as a specific next action
| Observed problem | Useful recovery |
|---|---|
| A payload digest or byte size differs | Find whether the download failed or the file was transformed. Acquire the pinned realization or document a coherent new derivative; never relabel different bytes as a match. |
| A manifest edit breaks its carrier pin | Recompute the exact manifest-byte bindings for the new release, then check carrier and release descriptors together. |
| A required group is incomplete | Follow the dependency graph and acquire the missing exact members. Report a partial selection honestly. |
| A graph collapses instrument and model identity | Restore distinct IRIs and the representation relation; rerun the negative and positive examples. |
| A timestamp is valid but its meaning is uncertain | Preserve the source qualification. Separate file history, capture time, historical scope and measurement time. |
| A client cannot execute a profile | Keep useful lower-level inspection available and state the unsupported operation. Test a compatible client for the claimed task. |
4. Write a report someone else can inspect
Technical detail · Illustrative handover note · fill with your real inputs
Subject and scope:
[instrument / state / configuration / research question]
Source releases:
VAO Standard 0.5.0; MODAVIS Ontology Network 0.1.0
[exact object or dataset version and source identifier]
Inputs:
[manifest / graph / realization / carrier identity and SHA-256]
Tools and commands:
[release, environment, exact command and working directory]
Checks completed:
[profile or layer, result, retained diagnostic report]
Checks not performed:
[runtime / publication / acoustic / historical review, as applicable]
Reuse:
[resource creators, terms, source links, derivative changes]
Remaining questions:
[what the evidence does not yet establish]The template is a human-readable handover note, not a normative VAO materialization receipt or a machine-readable validation report. Use the released schema for those artifacts. A receipt documents acquisition; a technical report documents checks; a research account explains what their combined evidenceEvidenceMaterial offered as grounds for a claim. Its relevance depends on the claim, context, transmission and interpretation.Work through the Cuntz example → can support.
- Source releaseRead the rights recordCheck the specific resource and release.retain attribution
- DerivativeDescribe your changesKeep creator credit and the applicable terms.carry terms forward
- DistributionCredit travels with itGive downstream readers the source and license.
5. Make the first reuse easy
Give the next person a small entry point, a concise explanation and one runnable example. Link the full preservation copy, original source, terms and validation evidence. Keep earlier released artifacts immutable when the account changes. For a repository distribution, follow the versioned repository profile and record the actual published carrier identities.
For an ontology adaptation, document your application profile and any project-owned terms or mapping graph. Keep assertions and source evidence available behind convenience displays. For a 3D notebook, provide the attributed poster and complete explanation alongside optional rendering. A reader should be able to understand the result without a GPU and distinguish a visual demonstration from a measured or playable research claim.
Which Cuntz identifier belongs in a citation?
Versioned citation separates the physical subject, the released research object and the explanation or derived artifact actually used.
- Object releaseVersion DOIIdentifies the published Cuntz package.name the relevant member
- Exact realizationDigest & identifierIdentifies the model bytes actually used.cite the explanatory account
- ExplanationNotebook editionIdentifies the teaching text you consulted.
Work through the example 3 STEPS
A reader uses the notebook’s model to discuss a geometry, while another uses the 1281 mm workbook observation. Their references should identify different evidence even though both concern Cuntz.
Identify the release
Use version DOI 10.5281/zenodo.22151203 for the inspected dataset. Record the specific realization or observation, rather than citing only the project community.
Identify what was used
For the web preview, retain the derivative’s digest and transformation note. For the observation, identify the pipe, property, source cell and workbook realization.
Cite the explanation separately
Use “Cite this page” for the notebook’s fixed edition. Its fingerprint identifies the explanation; it does not replace the source dataset or model fingerprint.
- Cuntz Positiv · VAO 0.5.0-rc.2 ↗
Published manifest: identities, measurement observations, realization digests, profiles and rights. Exact examples checked against this release.
- VAO Standard 0.5.0 ↗
The standard contract is separate from the Cuntz dataset content version 0.5.0-rc.2.
The dataset content version 0.5.0-rc.2, VAO format version 0.5.0 and website edition are separate version systems.
The useful distinction. A citation chain lets a reader recover both the evidence and the interpretation.