Jira progress: loading…

TG-ATTC-3

TrustGate - Signal Attestation Catalog - Appendicies

APPENDIX A — Canonical Artifact Summary

A.1. Purpose

This appendix provides a consolidated reference of the canonical artifacts defined by the TrustGate architecture.

It serves as a high-level reference for developers, architects, auditors, and implementers by summarizing the purpose, lifecycle, persistence, and governance responsibilities of each artifact.

Unless otherwise specified, the canonical definition of each artifact is provided by its respective TrustGate specification.

A.2. Architectural Layers

TrustGate artifacts belong to one of three constitutional layers.

Layer	Purpose
Registry Objects	Canonical definitions governed through registries
Runtime Artifacts	Immutable operational artifacts produced during execution
Published Assurance Artifacts	Canonical artifacts exchanged, verified, and governed across ZAYAZ Domains

Each layer has distinct governance responsibilities.

A.3. Registry Objects

Registry Objects define governed metadata and constitutional definitions.

They are maintained through controlled publication workflows and are never created automatically during runtime.

Artifact	Identifier	Registry	Purpose
Validation Rule	VRID	`zar.validation_rule_registry`	Defines canonical validation logic
Trust Intelligence	TIID	`zar.trust_intelligence_registry`	Defines AI-generated Trust Intelligence Objects
Trust Object	TOID	`zar.trust_object_registry`	Defines canonical Trust Objects
Trust Vector	TVID	`zar.trust_vector_registry`	Defines canonical Trust Vectors
Trust Operational Flag	(system managed)	`zar.trust_operational_flag`	Defines operational trust conditions
Trust Lifecycle State	(system managed)	`zar.trust_lifecycle_state`	Defines governed lifecycle states
Trust Status	(system managed)	`zar.trust_status`	Defines canonical trust status values

Registry Objects provide the constitutional vocabulary of TrustGate.

A.4. Runtime Artifacts

Runtime Artifacts are generated automatically during platform execution.

They preserve operational history while remaining immutable after creation.

Artifact	Primary Identifier	Purpose
USO Instance	USO ID	Runtime signal instance
TG-VRES	USO lineage	Validation result
TG-VEVID	VEVID	Validation evidence
TG-AEVENT	Telemetry Event ID	Attestation runtime event
TG-INTEL	TIID	AI-generated Trust Intelligence
TrustGate Telemetry Event	Event ID	Operational monitoring and telemetry

Runtime Artifacts document platform execution.

They do not define constitutional governance.

A.5. Published Assurance Artifacts

Published Assurance Artifacts represent governed, exchangeable trust objects.

They are immutable once published.

Artifact	Identifier	Registry	Purpose
TG-ATTEST	TAID	`zar.trust_attestation_registry`	Canonical Trust Attestation
Trust Object	TOID	`zar.trust_object_registry`	Published trust assessment
Trust Vector	TVID	`zar.trust_vector_registry`	Published trust dimension
Federation Package (TG-FPACK)	(future)	Federation Registry	Exchange package between ZAYAZ Domains

Published Assurance Artifacts form the constitutional trust layer of TrustGate.

A.6. Canonical Artifact Relationships

The following diagram illustrates the relationship between the principal TrustGate artifacts.

Signal

↓

USO Instance

↓

Validation Rule (VRID)

↓

TG-VRES

↓

TG-VEVID

↓

Trust Object (TOID)

↓

Trust Vector (TVID)

↓

TG-ATTEST (TAID)

↓

TG-INTEL (TIID)

↓

Federation Exchange

↓

Receiving ZAYAZ Domain

Each artifact contributes additional assurance while preserving complete computational lineage.

A.7. Artifact Responsibilities

Each canonical artifact has a single constitutional responsibility.

Artifact	Constitutional Responsibility
VRID	Defines validation logic
TG-VRES	Records validation outcome
TG-VEVID	Preserves validation evidence
TO	Represents trust assessment
TV	Represents trust dimensions
TG-ATTEST	Certifies trust
TG-INTEL	Interprets trust
TG-AEVENT	Records attestation runtime execution

No artifact duplicates the responsibility of another.

A.8. Lifecycle Categories

Canonical artifacts participate in different lifecycle models.

Category	Lifecycle
Registry Objects	Governed publication lifecycle
Runtime Artifacts	Immutable runtime lifecycle
Published Artifacts	CALM lifecycle

Lifecycle semantics are defined by the Canonical Artifact Lifecycle Model (CALM).

A.9. Persistence Summary

The following registries constitute the canonical persistence layer for TrustGate.

Registry	Primary Purpose
`zar.validation_rule_registry`	Validation definitions
`zar.trust_object_registry`	Trust Objects
`zar.trust_vector_registry`	Trust Vectors
`zar.trust_intelligence_registry`	Trust Intelligence
`zar.trust_attestation_registry`	Trust Attestations
`zar.trustgate_telemetry_event`	Runtime telemetry
`zar.uso_instance`	Runtime signal lineage

Additional implementation tables may exist but shall not replace the canonical registries defined by this specification.

A.10. Architectural Principles

The canonical artifact model is governed by the following principles.

Every canonical artifact has exactly one constitutional responsibility.
Every published artifact shall possess a canonical identifier.
Runtime artifacts shall remain immutable.
Registry Objects shall define—but never duplicate—runtime behavior.
Published artifacts shall preserve complete lineage.
Trust Intelligence shall interpret—not replace—published assurance.
Federation shall preserve artifact identity.
Replay shall preserve artifact integrity.

These principles are normative.

A.11. Summary

The TrustGate architecture is built upon a coherent family of canonical artifacts that separate governance, execution, assurance, intelligence, and federation into clearly defined constitutional responsibilities.

By distinguishing Registry Objects, Runtime Artifacts, and Published Assurance Artifacts, the platform achieves deterministic execution, complete traceability, replayable assurance, explainable intelligence, and interoperable federation while maintaining a clean and scalable architectural model.

APPENDIX B — Canonical Identifier Reference

B.1. Purpose

This appendix provides a consolidated reference for the canonical identifiers used by the TrustGate architecture.

All identifiers defined herein are governed by the Canonical Identifier Architecture (CIA), which establishes the principles for identity generation, uniqueness, immutability, lifecycle, and traceability across the ZAYAZ platform.

This appendix summarizes the identifiers used by TrustGate and their relationships to canonical artifacts.

B.2. Architectural Principles

Every canonical identifier shall:

identify exactly one governed object;
remain globally unique;
remain immutable after publication;
support deterministic replay;
preserve lineage;
support federation;
be governed by CIA.

Identifiers shall never be regenerated for existing artifacts.

B.3. Platform Identifier Family

The following identifiers are platform-wide identifiers defined by the Canonical Identifier Architecture.

Identifier	Name	Governs	Canonical Registry
CSI	Canonical Signal Identifier	Signal semantics	SSSR
CMID	Canonical Managed Identifier	Managed component	ZAR
USO ID	Universal Signal Ontology Instance Identifier	Runtime signal instance	`zar.uso_instance`

These identifiers form the foundation upon which TrustGate operates.

B.4. TrustGate Identifier Family

TrustGate introduces additional identifiers for governed assurance artifacts.

Identifier	Canonical Artifact	Registry
VRID	Validation Rule	`zar.validation_rule_registry`
VEVID	Validation Evidence	Validation Evidence Registry
TOID	Trust Object	`zar.trust_object_registry`
TVID	Trust Vector	`zar.trust_vector_registry`
TAID	Trust Attestation	`zar.trust_attestation_registry`
TIID	Trust Intelligence	`zar.trust_intelligence_registry`

Each identifier governs one constitutional artifact family.

B.5. Identifier Responsibilities

Every identifier has exactly one constitutional responsibility.

Identifier	Responsibility
CSI	Defines what a signal means
CMID	Identifies who produced or processed it
USO ID	Identifies the runtime occurrence of the signal
VRID	Identifies the validation rule applied
VEVID	Identifies the validation evidence collected
TOID	Identifies the Trust Object produced
TVID	Identifies the Trust Vector produced
TAID	Identifies the published Trust Attestation
TIID	Identifies the Trust Intelligence Object

No identifier duplicates another.

B.6. Identifier Relationships

The identifiers participate in a deterministic lineage.

CSI
      \
       \
        USO ID
       /
CMID

↓

VRID

↓

VEVID

↓

TOID

↓

TVID

↓

TAID

↓

TIID

Every identifier contributes additional governance without replacing upstream identity.

B.7. Identifier Persistence

Identifiers are persisted within their respective canonical registries.

Identifier	Registry
CSI	Signal Semantic Source Registry (SSSR)
CMID	ZAYAZ Artifact Registry (ZAR)
USO ID	`zar.uso_instance`
VRID	`zar.validation_rule_registry`
VEVID	Validation Evidence Registry
TOID	`zar.trust_object_registry`
TVID	`zar.trust_vector_registry`
TAID	`zar.trust_attestation_registry`
TIID	`zar.trust_intelligence_registry`

Registries remain the canonical source of truth for their governed artifacts.

B.8. Identifier Lifecycle

Identifiers remain constant throughout the lifecycle of their associated artifacts.

Lifecycle state transitions shall never change an identifier.

For example:

Draft

↓

Approved

↓

Published

↓

Operational

↓

Revoked

↓

Archived

The artifact lifecycle changes.

The identifier does not.

B.9. Identifier Federation

During federation:

identifiers shall be preserved;
identifiers shall not be regenerated;
identifiers shall remain globally unique;
receiving ZAYAZ Domains shall reference original identifiers.

Federation therefore exchanges governed artifacts—not new identities.

B.10. Identifier Replay

Replay execution shall preserve every canonical identifier.

Replay shall therefore reproduce:

CSI;
CMID;
USO ID;
VRID;
VEVID;
TOID;
TVID;
TAID;
TIID.

Identifier preservation is a constitutional requirement for deterministic replay.

B.11. Identifier Governance

Identifier generation shall comply with the Canonical Identifier Architecture (CIA).

CIA defines:

generation algorithms;
uniqueness requirements;
version semantics;
publication rules;
federation behavior;
governance responsibilities.

This specification references CIA but does not redefine identifier generation.

B.12. Identifier Invariants

The following invariant families govern canonical identifiers.

Invariant Family	Scope
CIA-*	Platform-wide identifier governance
TGATT-*	Trust Attestation identifiers
TGVAL-*	Validation identifiers
TGTRUST-*	Trust identifiers
TGINTEL-*	Trust Intelligence identifiers
CIR-*	Constitutional identifier rules

Normative invariant definitions are maintained by the Canonical Invariant Registry (CIR).

B.13. Summary

The Canonical Identifier Reference establishes the governed identity model for TrustGate.

By extending the platform-wide identifiers defined by the Canonical Identifier Architecture with the TrustGate-specific identifiers VRID, VEVID, TOID, TVID, TAID, and TIID, the architecture provides complete, immutable, replayable, and federatable identity across the assurance lifecycle.

Each identifier governs exactly one constitutional artifact, ensuring that identity, semantics, execution, trust, attestation, and intelligence remain distinct while preserving complete lineage throughout the ZAYAZ ecosystem.

APPENDIX C — Attestation Type Catalog

C.1 Purpose

This appendix defines the canonical catalog of TrustGate Attestation Types.

Attestation Types classify the constitutional purpose of a Trust Attestation (TG-ATTEST) while remaining independent of implementation details.

Each published Trust Attestation shall declare exactly one canonical Attestation Type.

The catalog is normative.

C.2 Architectural Principles

Attestation Types shall:

classify the purpose of an attestation;
remain implementation independent;
support deterministic replay;
support federation;
preserve explainability;
remain immutable once published.

The Attestation Type describes what is being attested, not how the attestation was produced.

C.3 Canonical Attestation Type Catalog

Code	Name	Purpose
ATT-VAL	Validation Attestation	Certifies validation outcomes.
ATT-EVD	Evidence Attestation	Certifies evidence integrity and completeness.
ATT-REP	Replay Attestation	Certifies deterministic replay results.
ATT-TRUST	Trust Attestation	Certifies Trust Objects and Trust Vectors.
ATT-POL	Policy Attestation	Certifies policy compliance.
ATT-GOV	Governance Attestation	Certifies governance decisions and approvals.
ATT-FED	Federation Attestation	Certifies cross-domain trust exchange.
ATT-DAL	Ledger Attestation	Certifies Distributed Assurance Ledger anchoring.
ATT-AI	AI Governance Attestation	Certifies AI governance, models, or explainability evidence.

These Attestation Types constitute the constitutional vocabulary of TrustGate assurance.

C.4 ATT-VAL — Validation Attestation

Validation Attestations certify that one or more validation activities were successfully completed.

Typical references include:

VRID;
TG-VRES;
TG-VEVID;
USO lineage.

Typical use cases include:

CSRD validation;
ESG rule validation;
regulatory compliance;
quality assurance.

C.5 ATT-EVD — Evidence Attestation

Evidence Attestations certify the authenticity, completeness, and integrity of supporting evidence.

Typical references include:

TG-VEVID;
evidence repositories;
source documents;
external evidence providers.

Evidence Attestations strengthen trust without re-performing validation.

C.6 ATT-REP — Replay Attestation

Replay Attestations certify that historical computational replay has produced deterministic results.

Typical references include:

replay execution;
replay profile;
replay checksum;
replay lineage.

Replay Attestations demonstrate reproducibility.

C.7 ATT-TRUST — Trust Attestation

Trust Attestations certify published trust assessments.

Typical references include:

TOID;
TVID;
Trust Status;
Trust Lifecycle.

Trust Attestations represent the primary assurance artifacts produced by the Trust Model.

C.8 ATT-POL — Policy Attestation

Policy Attestations certify compliance with one or more governance or regulatory policies.

Typical references include:

governance policies;
validation policies;
regulatory frameworks;
constitutional rules.

Policy Attestations document compliance.

C.9 ATT-GOV — Governance Attestation

Governance Attestations certify formal governance decisions.

Examples include:

publication approval;
supervisory approval;
delegated approval;
revocation approval.

Governance Attestations preserve organizational accountability.

C.10 ATT-FED — Federation Attestation

Federation Attestations certify trust exchanged between independent ZAYAZ Domains.

Typical references include:

originating E-C-O Number;
receiving E-C-O Number;
federation profile;
federation policy.

Federation Attestations preserve trust portability.

C.11 ATT-DAL — Ledger Attestation

Ledger Attestations certify successful anchoring within the Distributed Assurance Ledger (DAL).

Typical references include:

ledger transaction;
anchor hash;
timestamp;
verification proof.

Ledger Attestations strengthen long-term integrity.

C.12 ATT-AI — AI Governance Attestation

AI Governance Attestations certify governance surrounding artificial intelligence.

Typical references include:

AI model identifier;
model lineage;
explainability report;
governance approval;
Trust Intelligence.

These attestations certify AI governance—not AI predictions.

C.13 Attestation Relationships

Attestation Types may reference multiple canonical artifacts.

Validation

↓

Evidence

↓

Trust

↓

Governance

↓

Replay

↓

Federation

↓

Ledger

↓

AI Governance

Multiple attestations may exist for the same computational process.

Each attestation certifies a distinct constitutional responsibility.

C.14 Attestation Selection

An implementation shall select the Attestation Type based on the constitutional purpose of the attestation.

For example:

Scenario	Recommended Type
Validation completed	ATT-VAL
Evidence certified	ATT-EVD
Replay completed	ATT-REP
Trust assessment published	ATT-TRUST
Policy compliance approved	ATT-POL
Governance approval issued	ATT-GOV
Cross-ECO trust exchange	ATT-FED
DAL anchoring completed	ATT-DAL
AI governance certified	ATT-AI

Attestation Types shall not be combined.

Each TG-ATTEST shall declare exactly one Attestation Type.

C.15 Extensibility

Future Attestation Types may be introduced.

New types shall:

preserve backward compatibility;
receive constitutional approval;
be registered within the canonical catalog;
comply with CIA, CALM, and CIR.

Implementations shall ignore unknown future types unless explicitly supported.

C.16 Constitutional Principles

The Attestation Type Catalog is governed by the following principles.

Every TG-ATTEST shall declare exactly one Attestation Type.
Attestation Types classify purpose, not implementation.
Attestation Types shall remain immutable after publication.
Attestation Types shall support replay.
Attestation Types shall support federation.
Attestation Types shall preserve explainability.
Future Attestation Types shall remain backward compatible.

These principles are normative.

C.17 Summary

The Attestation Type Catalog establishes the constitutional classification system for TrustGate Attestations.

By defining a controlled vocabulary of canonical Attestation Types, the catalog enables consistent assurance semantics across validation, evidence, trust, governance, replay, federation, ledger anchoring, and AI governance while preserving interoperability, deterministic replay, and long-term governance throughout the ZAYAZ ecosystem.

APPENDIX D — Assurance Level Reference

D.1 Purpose

This appendix defines the canonical TrustGate Assurance Levels.

Assurance Levels classify the degree of confidence, governance, traceability, and trust that may be placed in a published Trust Attestation (TG-ATTEST).

They provide a common assurance vocabulary across the ZAYAZ ecosystem while remaining independent of implementation details.

D.2 Architectural Principles

Assurance Levels shall:

represent constitutional assurance capabilities;
be cumulative;
support deterministic replay;
support federation;
preserve explainability;
remain technology independent.

Higher assurance levels inherit the guarantees of all lower levels.

D.3 Assurance Level Hierarchy

AL5
│
├── AL4
│     │
│     ├── AL3
│     │     │
│     │     ├── AL2
│     │     │     │
│     │     │     └── AL1

Each level extends—not replaces—the guarantees of previous levels.

D.4 Assurance Level Catalog

Level	Name	Primary Purpose
AL1	Computational Assurance	Confirms successful computation and basic validation.
AL2	Verified Assurance	Adds governed validation and evidence integrity.
AL3	Governed Assurance	Adds lifecycle governance, publication controls, and explainability.
AL4	Federated Assurance	Adds cross-ECO trust portability and federation verification.
AL5	Constitutional Assurance	Adds cryptographic anchoring, deterministic replay, and constitutional compliance.

D.5 AL1 — Computational Assurance

Computational Assurance confirms that an assurance process completed successfully.

Typical characteristics include:

successful execution;
successful validation;
canonical identifiers;
runtime lineage;
telemetry capture.

AL1 demonstrates that a computation occurred.

It does not certify governance.

D.6 AL2 — Verified Assurance

Verified Assurance extends AL1 by introducing governed validation.

Typical characteristics include:

governed validation rules;
validation evidence;
validation lineage;
validation explainability;
validation replay readiness.

AL2 demonstrates that the computation has been independently verified.

D.7 AL3 — Governed Assurance

Governed Assurance extends AL2 through organizational governance.

Typical characteristics include:

publication approval;
lifecycle governance;
policy compliance;
governance audit trail;
TrustGate explainability.

AL3 demonstrates that assurance has been governed.

D.8 AL4 — Federated Assurance

Federated Assurance extends AL3 into the ZAYAZ Federation.

Typical characteristics include:

federation verification;
cross-ECO portability;
delegated trust;
federation trust propagation;
federation revocation support.

AL4 demonstrates that assurance remains trustworthy outside its originating ZAYAZ Domain.

D.9 AL5 — Constitutional Assurance

Constitutional Assurance represents the highest TrustGate assurance level.

Typical characteristics include:

Distributed Assurance Ledger (DAL) anchoring;
cryptographic signatures;
immutable Trust Attestations;
deterministic replay;
constitutional invariant compliance;
complete computational lineage.

AL5 demonstrates that assurance satisfies the constitutional principles of the ZAYAZ platform.

D.10 Capability Matrix

Capability	AL1	AL2	AL3	AL4	AL5
Runtime Lineage	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Validation	✓	✓	✓	✓	✓
Validation Evidence		✓	✓	✓	✓
Explainability		✓	✓	✓	✓
Governance Workflow			✓	✓	✓
Lifecycle Governance			✓	✓	✓
Federation				✓	✓
Trust Delegation				✓	✓
Cryptographic Signature					✓
DAL Anchoring					✓
Deterministic Replay					✓
Constitutional Compliance					✓

D.11 Assurance Progression

A Trust Attestation may progress through assurance levels during its lifecycle.

For example:

Validation Completed

↓

AL1

↓

Evidence Verified

↓

AL2

↓

Governance Approval

↓

AL3

↓

Federation Exchange

↓

AL4

↓

DAL Anchored

↓

AL5

Progression shall never invalidate previous assurance.

D.12 Federation Considerations

Receiving ZAYAZ Domains shall preserve the originating Assurance Level.

Federation may strengthen assurance through additional attestations.

Federation shall not reduce the assurance level of an existing published Trust Attestation.

D.13 Replay Considerations

Replay verification shall reproduce the assurance level that existed at the original publication.

Replay shall preserve:

assurance metadata;
governance decisions;
cryptographic integrity;
constitutional lineage.

Replay shall not assign a different Assurance Level unless a new Trust Attestation is issued.

D.14 Governance

Assignment of an Assurance Level shall be governed.

Implementations shall not assign Assurance Levels arbitrarily.

The assigned level shall be supported by objective evidence, governance records, and constitutional compliance.

D.15 Constitutional Principles

The Assurance Level model is governed by the following principles.

Assurance Levels are cumulative.
Assurance Levels classify assurance—not implementation.
Higher levels inherit lower-level guarantees.
Assurance Levels shall remain replayable.
Assurance Levels shall support federation.
Assurance Levels shall preserve explainability.
Assurance Levels shall be objectively verifiable.

These principles are normative.

D.16 Relationship to the ZAYAZ Architecture

The Assurance Level model integrates directly with:

Component	Relationship
TrustGate Trust Model	Trust evaluation
TrustGate Validation Rule Registry	Validation quality
TrustGate Attestation Catalog	Attestation assurance
TrustGate Replay Specification	Replay guarantees
TrustGate Federation Profiles	Cross-ECO assurance
Canonical Artifact Lifecycle Model (CALM)	Lifecycle governance
Canonical Identifier Architecture (CIA)	Identifier integrity
Canonical Invariant Registry (CIR)	Constitutional compliance
Distributed Assurance Ledger (DAL)	Cryptographic anchoring
DSAIL	Explainability and Trust Intelligence

D.17 Summary

The TrustGate Assurance Level model provides a constitutional framework for expressing the strength of assurance associated with published Trust Attestations.

By defining cumulative assurance capabilities—from computational correctness through validation, governance, federation, and constitutional integrity—the model enables consistent interpretation of assurance across replay, federation, AI-assisted analysis, regulatory reporting, and long-term governance throughout the ZAYAZ ecosystem.

APPENDIX E — Lifecycle State Reference

E.1 Purpose

This appendix provides the canonical lifecycle reference for TrustGate Attestations (TG-ATTEST).

Lifecycle states describe the governed progression of an attestation from creation through publication, operation, retirement, and archival.

The lifecycle is governed by the Canonical Artifact Lifecycle Model (CALM) and implemented through the TrustGate lifecycle registries.

E.2 Architectural Principles

The lifecycle model shall:

define a deterministic sequence of governed states;
preserve complete lifecycle history;
prohibit invalid state transitions;
support replay;
support federation;
remain independent of operational trust status.

Lifecycle states describe governance—not trustworthiness.

E.3 Canonical Lifecycle

The canonical lifecycle of a Trust Attestation is shown below.

Draft

↓

Under Review

↓

Approved

↓

Published

↓

Operational

↓

Superseded
        ↘
         Revoked

↓

Archived

Every published Trust Attestation shall follow this governed progression.

E.4 Lifecycle State Catalog

State	Purpose
Draft	Initial artifact under preparation.
Under Review	Under governance or technical review.
Approved	Approved for publication.
Published	Officially published and immutable.
Operational	Active and available for runtime use or federation.
Superseded	Replaced by a newer governed attestation.
Revoked	Invalidated through a governed revocation process.
Archived	Retained for historical replay and audit.

These lifecycle states constitute the constitutional lifecycle vocabulary for TrustGate Attestations.

E.5 State Descriptions

Draft

The attestation exists only within the preparation process.

Characteristics include:

editable;
unpublished;
not externally visible;
not federated.

Under Review

The attestation is undergoing formal review.

Typical activities include:

governance review;
validation review;
cryptographic verification;
policy verification.

The artifact remains unpublished.

Approved

The attestation has completed all required reviews.

It is eligible for publication but has not yet become operational.

Published

Publication creates the canonical Trust Attestation.

From this point:

the TAID becomes permanent;
the artifact becomes immutable;
replay shall preserve the published state;
federation may reference the attestation.

Published artifacts shall never be modified.

Operational

Operational attestations may participate in:

TrustGate runtime;
federation;
verification;
replay;
governance queries.

Operational represents availability—not lifecycle completion.

Superseded

A newer attestation replaces the current one.

The superseded attestation:

remains immutable;
remains replayable;
remains auditable;
retains its TAID.

Superseded artifacts are never deleted.

Revoked

Revocation invalidates the trust represented by an attestation.

Revocation shall:

preserve the original artifact;
preserve historical lineage;
preserve replay compatibility;
record governance justification.

Revocation does not erase history.

Archived

Archived attestations are retained for:

replay;
historical audit;
federation history;
regulatory retention.

Archived artifacts remain immutable.

E.6 Permitted Lifecycle Transitions

The following transitions are permitted.

From	To
Draft	Under Review
Under Review	Approved
Approved	Published
Published	Operational
Operational	Superseded
Operational	Revoked
Superseded	Archived
Revoked	Archived

Transitions not listed above are prohibited unless explicitly defined by CALM.

E.7 Lifecycle Invariants

Lifecycle processing shall satisfy the following principles.

Every TG-ATTEST begins in Draft.
Published attestations are immutable.
Lifecycle history is append-only.
Invalid transitions are prohibited.
Revocation preserves history.
Supersession preserves lineage.
Archival preserves replay.

These requirements are normative.

E.8 Relationship to Operational Status

Lifecycle state shall not be confused with operational trust status.

Lifecycle answers:

Where is the artifact in its governed lifecycle?

Operational status answers:

How should the artifact currently be interpreted by the platform?

Operational interpretation is governed separately through:

zar.trust_status
zar.trust_operational_flag

This separation preserves constitutional governance while allowing operational flexibility.

E.9 Replay Considerations

Replay shall reproduce:

lifecycle state;
transition timestamps;
governance approvals;
publication history;
revocation history.

Replay shall never reconstruct a different lifecycle.

E.10 Federation Considerations

Federation shall preserve:

TAID;
lifecycle state;
publication history;
revocation history;
supersession relationships.

Receiving ZAYAZ Domains shall not alter the originating lifecycle.

E.11 Relationship to CALM

The TrustGate lifecycle is an implementation of the Canonical Artifact Lifecycle Model.

CALM defines:

lifecycle semantics;
transition governance;
publication rules;
archival requirements;
constitutional lifecycle invariants.

This specification adopts CALM without redefining it.

E.12 Summary

The Lifecycle State Reference defines the governed progression of TrustGate Attestations from creation through archival.

By separating lifecycle governance from operational trust status, preserving immutable publication history, and aligning with the Canonical Artifact Lifecycle Model (CALM), the lifecycle model ensures deterministic replay, auditable governance, federation interoperability, and long-term constitutional integrity across the ZAYAZ ecosystem.

APPENDIX F — Canonical Relationships

F.1 Purpose

This appendix defines the canonical relationships between the principal TrustGate artifacts.

Rather than describing implementation workflows, this appendix documents the constitutional relationships that preserve identity, lineage, governance, replayability, and federation across the TrustGate architecture.

The relationship model is normative.

F.2 Architectural Principles

Canonical relationships shall:

preserve complete computational lineage;
preserve artifact identity;
support deterministic replay;
remain immutable after publication;
support federation;
avoid circular dependencies.

Every canonical relationship shall have exactly one constitutional purpose.

F.3 Canonical TrustGate Architecture

The principal TrustGate artifacts form the following constitutional relationship model.

                 Signal Definition
                     (CSI)
                        │
                        │
                        ▼
                Runtime Signal Instance
                     (USO ID)
                        │
                        │
                Produced By
                        │
                        ▼
          Managed Component (CMI)
                        │
                        │
────────────────────────────────────────────────────────

                        │
                        ▼
           Validation Rule (VRID)
                        │
                        ▼
       Validation Result (TG-VRES)
                        │
                        ▼
 Validation Evidence (TG-VEVID / VEVID)
                        │
                        ▼
          Trust Object (TOID)
                        │
                        ▼
          Trust Vector (TVID)
                        │
                        ▼
     Trust Attestation (TG-ATTEST / TAID)
                        │
                        ▼
 Trust Intelligence (TG-INTEL / TIID)
                        │
                        ▼
 Federation Exchange (EGFS)

Each artifact adds additional assurance without replacing previous artifacts.

F.4 Identity Relationships

Every canonical artifact is uniquely identified through the Canonical Identifier Architecture (CIA).

Artifact	Identifier
Signal Definition	CSI
Managed Component	CMI
Runtime Signal	USO ID
Validation Rule	VRID
Validation Evidence	VEVID
Trust Object	TOID
Trust Vector	TVID
Trust Attestation	TAID
Trust Intelligence	TIID

Identity remains stable throughout the artifact lifecycle.

F.5 Governance Relationships

Governance progresses through the TrustGate assurance model.

Validation

↓

Evidence

↓

Trust

↓

Attestation

↓

Intelligence

↓

Federation

Each layer extends governance without replacing previous governance decisions.

F.6 Registry Relationships

Every governed artifact has one canonical registry.

Registry	Governs
`zar.validation_rule_registry`	Validation Rules
`zar.trust_object_registry`	Trust Objects
`zar.trust_vector_registry`	Trust Vectors
`zar.trust_attestation_registry`	Trust Attestations
`zar.trust_intelligence_registry`	Trust Intelligence
`zar.uso_instance`	Runtime Signal Instances
`zar.trustgate_telemetry_event`	Runtime Telemetry

Registries provide the constitutional system of record.

F.7 Runtime Relationships

Runtime execution produces immutable assurance artifacts.

Signal

↓

Validation

↓

Evidence

↓

Trust Assessment

↓

Attestation

↓

Telemetry

↓

Replay

↓

Federation

Runtime relationships are append-only.

F.8 Lifecycle Relationships

All governed artifacts participate in CALM.

Draft

↓

Review

↓

Approved

↓

Published

↓

Operational

↓

Superseded

↓

Archived

Lifecycle progression never alters canonical identity.

F.9 Replay Relationships

Replay reconstructs the complete assurance chain.

CSI

↓

CMI

↓

USO

↓

VRID

↓

VEVID

↓

TOID

↓

TVID

↓

TAID

↓

TIID

Replay shall preserve every canonical relationship.

F.10 Federation Relationships

Federation exchanges published assurance artifacts between independent ZAYAZ Domains.

Originating ECO

↓

TG-ATTEST

↓

EGFS Federation

↓

Receiving ECO

↓

Verification

↓

Trust Propagation

Federation preserves artifact identity.

Federation does not regenerate artifacts.

F.11 AI Relationships

Trust Intelligence extends—not replaces—the constitutional assurance chain.

Validation

↓

Trust

↓

Attestation

↓

TG-INTEL

↓

Decision Support

AI consumes governed assurance.

AI does not redefine it.

F.12 Constitutional Dependencies

The TrustGate architecture depends upon the following constitutional frameworks.

Framework	Purpose
CIA	Canonical identifiers
CALM	Lifecycle governance
CIR	Constitutional invariants
Trust Model	Trust evaluation
Validation Rule Registry	Validation governance
Replay Specification	Deterministic replay
Federation Profiles	Cross-ECO interoperability
DAL	Distributed assurance anchoring
DSAIL	Explainable Trust Intelligence

These frameworks collectively establish the constitutional foundation of TrustGate.

F.13 Relationship Principles

Canonical relationships shall satisfy the following principles.

Every artifact shall have exactly one constitutional responsibility.
Every governed artifact shall possess a canonical identifier.
Relationships shall preserve lineage.
Relationships shall support replay.
Relationships shall support federation.
Relationships shall remain deterministic.
Relationships shall remain explainable.
Relationships shall preserve immutability.

These principles are normative.

F.14 Summary

The Canonical Relationship Model defines the constitutional structure of the TrustGate architecture.

By establishing deterministic relationships between signals, validation, evidence, trust, attestation, intelligence, and federation, the model ensures that every assurance decision can be traced, replayed, explained, governed, and exchanged without compromising identity, integrity, or interoperability across the ZAYAZ ecosystem.

APPENDIX G — Federation Exchange Reference

G.1 Purpose

This appendix defines the canonical artifacts exchanged between independent ZAYAZ Domains during TrustGate federation.

It serves as a normative reference for federation interoperability by describing the constitutional exchange objects, their relationships, and their governance.

Communication protocols, transport mechanisms, synchronization procedures, and federation profiles are specified separately in the TrustGate Federation Profiles and EGFS (Enterprise Green Federation Specification).

G.2 Architectural Principles

Federation exchanges shall:

preserve canonical identity;
preserve complete computational lineage;
preserve cryptographic integrity;
preserve replayability;
preserve governance history;
remain implementation independent.

Federation exchanges artifacts—not computations.

G.3 Federation Exchange Architecture

The constitutional exchange model is illustrated below.

Originating ZAYAZ Domain
        │
        ▼
Published Trust Artifacts
        │
        ▼
TrustGate Federation Layer
        │
        ▼
EGFS Exchange
        │
        ▼
Receiving ZAYAZ Domain
        │
        ▼
Verification
        │
        ▼
Trust Propagation

Only published canonical artifacts shall participate in federation.

G.4 Canonical Exchange Objects

The following artifacts may be exchanged between ZAYAZ Domains.

Artifact	Identifier	Purpose
TG-ATTEST	TAID	Published Trust Attestation
TG-INTEL	TIID	Trust Intelligence Object
TG-VEVID	VEVID	Validation Evidence
TO	TOID	Trust Object
TV	TVID	Trust Vector
VR	VRID	Validation Rule (when shared)
USO Reference	USO ID	Runtime lineage reference
CSI Reference	CSI	Signal semantics
CMI Reference	CMI	Producing managed artifact

Artifacts remain immutable after publication.

G.5 Exchange Relationships

A typical federation exchange consists of the following constitutional chain.

Signal

↓

Validation

↓

Evidence

↓

Trust

↓

Attestation

↓

Trust Intelligence

↓

Federation

↓

Verification

↓

Trust Propagation

Each receiving domain reconstructs the assurance chain using the exchanged artifacts.

G.6 Identity Preservation

Federation shall preserve all canonical identifiers.

Receiving domains shall never generate replacement identifiers.

The following identifiers shall remain unchanged.

Identifier
CSI
CMI
USO ID
VRID
VEVID
TOID
TVID
TAID
TIID

Canonical identity is globally stable.

G.7 Trust Propagation

Federation propagates trust—not ownership.

Receiving domains may:

verify artifacts;
reference artifacts;
extend artifacts through new attestations;
issue local Trust Intelligence.

Receiving domains shall not modify exchanged artifacts.

G.8 Delegated Trust

Trust may be delegated between participating ZAYAZ Domains.

Delegation shall preserve:

originating E-C-O Number;
delegated authority;
delegation scope;
delegation period;
delegation policy.

Delegation does not transfer constitutional ownership of the exchanged artifact.

G.9 Verification

Every exchanged artifact shall undergo verification before use.

Verification may include:

identifier verification;
signature verification;
lifecycle verification;
invariant verification;
replay verification;
policy verification.

Only successfully verified artifacts shall participate in trust propagation.

G.10 Replay

Federation replay shall reproduce the original exchange.

Replay shall preserve:

exchanged artifacts;
identifiers;
signatures;
timestamps;
federation metadata;
governance history.

Replay shall not reconstruct modified artifacts.

G.11 Federation Metadata

Every federation exchange should include sufficient metadata to support governance.

Typical metadata includes:

Metadata	Purpose
Originating E-C-O Number	Identifies the publishing organization
Receiving E-C-O Number	Identifies the recipient
Federation Profile	Governs exchange behaviour
Exchange Timestamp	Records publication time
Trust Profile	Defines trust semantics
Replay Reference	Enables deterministic replay

Additional metadata may be defined by EGFS.

G.12 Federation Lifecycle

Exchanged artifacts retain their original lifecycle.

Published

↓

Operational

↓

Superseded

↓

Revoked

↓

Archived

Receiving domains shall preserve lifecycle semantics.

G.13 Federation Governance

Federation shall preserve constitutional governance.

Receiving domains may:

issue additional attestations;
create local Trust Intelligence;
extend governance history.

Receiving domains shall not alter published source artifacts.

G.14 Constitutional Principles

Federation exchange is governed by the following principles.

Canonical identifiers shall be preserved.
Published artifacts shall remain immutable.
Federation shall preserve lineage.
Federation shall preserve replayability.
Federation shall preserve governance.
Federation shall preserve explainability.
Federation shall support delegated trust.
Federation shall support long-term interoperability.

These principles are normative.

G.15 Relationship to Other Specifications

This appendix complements the following TrustGate specifications.

Specification	Responsibility
TrustGate Federation Profiles	Federation protocols, synchronization, security, transport
EGFS	Cross-domain federation architecture
TrustGate Trust Model	Trust computation
TrustGate Validation Rule Registry	Validation governance
TrustGate Attestation Catalog	Trust Attestation model
TrustGate Replay Specification	Replay guarantees
CIA	Identifier preservation
CALM	Lifecycle preservation
CIR	Constitutional invariants

This appendix defines the exchange objects.

The referenced specifications define how those objects are governed and exchanged.

G.16 Summary

The Federation Exchange Reference establishes the constitutional exchange model for TrustGate federation.

By exchanging immutable, identified, and governed assurance artifacts—including Trust Attestations (TG-ATTEST), Trust Intelligence Objects (TG-INTEL), Trust Objects, Trust Vectors, Validation Evidence, and their associated canonical identifiers—TrustGate enables deterministic, replayable, explainable, and interoperable trust propagation across independent ZAYAZ Domains while preserving identity, lineage, governance, and constitutional integrity.

APPENDIX H — Reference Invariant Families

H.1 Purpose

This appendix provides a normative overview of the Canonical Invariant Families applicable to the TrustGate architecture.

The purpose of this appendix is to organize invariants by constitutional responsibility while referencing the Canonical Invariant Registry (CIR) as the authoritative source for individual invariant definitions.

This appendix does not redefine invariant semantics.

H.2 Architectural Principles

Invariant Families shall:

group invariants by constitutional responsibility;
remain stable across TrustGate releases;
support deterministic validation;
support replay;
support federation;
support explainability.

Individual invariants are governed exclusively by the Canonical Invariant Registry (CIR).

H.3 Constitutional Layering

Invariant Families govern different constitutional layers of the TrustGate architecture.

Platform Constitution
        │
        ▼
Canonical Invariant Registry (CIR)
        │
        ▼
Invariant Families
        │
        ▼
Individual Invariants
        │
        ▼
Runtime Enforcement

This layered approach allows new invariants to be introduced without changing the constitutional structure.

H.4 Platform Invariant Families

The following invariant families apply platform-wide and are shared across multiple ZAYAZ domains.

Family	Constitutional Responsibility
CIA-*	Canonical identifier architecture and identity integrity
CALM-*	Lifecycle governance and valid state transitions
CIR-*	Canonical invariant governance and registry integrity
DAL-*	Distributed Assurance Ledger integrity and anchoring
FED-*	Federation interoperability and identity preservation

These families establish the constitutional foundation upon which TrustGate is built.

H.5 TrustGate Invariant Families

The following invariant families are specific to the TrustGate domain.

Family	Governs
TGVAL-*	Validation rules, execution, evidence, and outcomes
TGTRUST-*	Trust Objects, Trust Vectors, Trust Status, and trust computation
TGATT-*	Trust Attestations and assurance publication
TGINTEL-*	Trust Intelligence generation, lineage, and explainability
TGREPLAY-*	Deterministic replay and computational reproducibility
TGFED-*	Cross-ECO trust exchange and propagation

Each family governs a distinct constitutional responsibility within TrustGate.

H.6 Artifact-Oriented Mapping

Each canonical artifact is governed by one or more invariant families.

Artifact	Primary Invariant Families
Validation Rule (VRID)	TGVAL-, CIA-
Validation Evidence (VEVID)	TGVAL-, TGREPLAY-
Trust Object (TOID)	TGTRUST-, CALM-
Trust Vector (TVID)	TGTRUST-, CALM-
Trust Attestation (TAID)	TGATT-, DAL-, CALM-*
Trust Intelligence (TIID)	TGINTEL-, TGTRUST-
Federation Exchange	TGFED-, FED-

Artifacts may participate in multiple invariant families, but each invariant has exactly one owning family.

H.7 Runtime Enforcement

Invariant Families are enforced throughout the TrustGate runtime.

Typical enforcement points include:

validation execution;
publication workflows;
replay execution;
federation verification;
DAL anchoring;
AI-assisted trust evaluation.

Runtime enforcement shall always reference the invariant definitions stored in the Canonical Invariant Registry.

H.8 Replay and Federation

Replay and federation rely on invariant families to preserve constitutional consistency.

Replay shall verify:

identifier invariants (CIA-*),
lifecycle invariants (CALM-*),
validation invariants (TGVAL-*),
trust invariants (TGTRUST-*),
attestation invariants (TGATT-*).

Federation shall additionally verify:

federation invariants (FED-* and TGFED-*),
identity preservation,
trust propagation,
governance continuity.

H.9 Relationship to the Canonical Invariant Registry

The Canonical Invariant Registry (CIR) is the authoritative source for:

invariant identifiers;
titles;
normative descriptions;
severity;
enforcement level;
lifecycle state;
version history;
implementation metadata.

This appendix provides only the constitutional classification of those invariants.

H.10 Extensibility

New invariant families may be introduced as additional ZAYAZ domains evolve.

Examples include:

Computation Hub;
MICE;
SIS;
Reports Hub;
ESG Knowledge Graph;
future TrustGate capabilities.

New families shall:

define a unique namespace;
document constitutional responsibility;
be registered within CIR;
remain backward compatible.

H.11 Constitutional Principles

Invariant Families are governed by the following principles.

Every invariant belongs to exactly one invariant family.
Every invariant family has exactly one constitutional responsibility.
Runtime enforcement shall reference CIR.
Replay shall verify applicable invariant families.
Federation shall preserve invariant compliance.
New invariant families shall remain backward compatible.

These principles are normative.

H.12 Relationship to the ZAYAZ Architecture

The invariant family model integrates with the following constitutional frameworks.

Framework	Relationship
CIA	Identifier integrity
CALM	Lifecycle governance
CIR	Authoritative invariant definitions
TrustGate Validation Rule Registry	Validation enforcement
TrustGate Trust Model	Trust evaluation
TrustGate Attestation Catalog	Attestation governance
TrustGate Federation Profiles	Federation verification
TrustGate Replay Specification	Replay assurance
DSAIL	AI explainability and Trust Intelligence
DAL	Cryptographic integrity

Together, these frameworks establish the constitutional governance model for TrustGate.

H.13 Summary

The Reference Invariant Families appendix provides the constitutional classification of the invariants that govern the TrustGate architecture.

By organizing invariants into stable families aligned with constitutional responsibilities, while delegating individual invariant definitions to the Canonical Invariant Registry (CIR), the architecture achieves scalable governance, deterministic runtime enforcement, replayable assurance, explainable AI, and interoperable federation without duplicating normative definitions.

GitHub Repo Request for Change (RFC)

APPENDIX A — Canonical Artifact Summary​

A.1. Purpose​

A.2. Architectural Layers​

A.3. Registry Objects​

A.4. Runtime Artifacts​

A.5. Published Assurance Artifacts​

A.6. Canonical Artifact Relationships​

A.7. Artifact Responsibilities​

A.8. Lifecycle Categories​

A.9. Persistence Summary​

A.10. Architectural Principles​

A.11. Summary​

APPENDIX B — Canonical Identifier Reference​

B.1. Purpose​

B.2. Architectural Principles​

B.3. Platform Identifier Family​

B.4. TrustGate Identifier Family​

B.5. Identifier Responsibilities​

B.6. Identifier Relationships​

B.7. Identifier Persistence​

B.8. Identifier Lifecycle​

B.9. Identifier Federation​

B.10. Identifier Replay​

B.11. Identifier Governance​

B.12. Identifier Invariants​

B.13. Summary​

APPENDIX C — Attestation Type Catalog​

C.1 Purpose​

C.2 Architectural Principles​

C.3 Canonical Attestation Type Catalog​

C.4 ATT-VAL — Validation Attestation​

C.5 ATT-EVD — Evidence Attestation​

C.6 ATT-REP — Replay Attestation​

C.7 ATT-TRUST — Trust Attestation​

C.8 ATT-POL — Policy Attestation​

C.9 ATT-GOV — Governance Attestation​

C.10 ATT-FED — Federation Attestation​

C.11 ATT-DAL — Ledger Attestation​

C.12 ATT-AI — AI Governance Attestation​

C.13 Attestation Relationships​

C.14 Attestation Selection​

C.15 Extensibility​

C.16 Constitutional Principles​

C.17 Summary​

APPENDIX D — Assurance Level Reference​

D.1 Purpose​

D.2 Architectural Principles​

D.3 Assurance Level Hierarchy​

D.4 Assurance Level Catalog​

D.5 AL1 — Computational Assurance​

D.6 AL2 — Verified Assurance​

D.7 AL3 — Governed Assurance​

D.8 AL4 — Federated Assurance​

D.9 AL5 — Constitutional Assurance​

D.10 Capability Matrix​

D.11 Assurance Progression​

D.12 Federation Considerations​

D.13 Replay Considerations​

D.14 Governance​

D.15 Constitutional Principles​

D.16 Relationship to the ZAYAZ Architecture​

D.17 Summary​

APPENDIX E — Lifecycle State Reference​

E.1 Purpose​

E.2 Architectural Principles​

E.3 Canonical Lifecycle​

E.4 Lifecycle State Catalog​

E.5 State Descriptions​

E.6 Permitted Lifecycle Transitions​

E.7 Lifecycle Invariants​

E.8 Relationship to Operational Status​

E.9 Replay Considerations​

E.10 Federation Considerations​

E.11 Relationship to CALM​

E.12 Summary​

APPENDIX F — Canonical Relationships​

F.1 Purpose​

F.2 Architectural Principles​

F.3 Canonical TrustGate Architecture​

F.4 Identity Relationships​

APPENDIX A — Canonical Artifact Summary

A.1. Purpose

A.2. Architectural Layers

A.3. Registry Objects

A.4. Runtime Artifacts

A.5. Published Assurance Artifacts

A.6. Canonical Artifact Relationships

A.7. Artifact Responsibilities

A.8. Lifecycle Categories

A.9. Persistence Summary

A.10. Architectural Principles

A.11. Summary

APPENDIX B — Canonical Identifier Reference

B.1. Purpose

B.2. Architectural Principles

B.3. Platform Identifier Family

B.4. TrustGate Identifier Family

B.5. Identifier Responsibilities

B.6. Identifier Relationships

B.7. Identifier Persistence

B.8. Identifier Lifecycle

B.9. Identifier Federation

B.10. Identifier Replay

B.11. Identifier Governance

B.12. Identifier Invariants

B.13. Summary

APPENDIX C — Attestation Type Catalog

C.1 Purpose

C.2 Architectural Principles

C.3 Canonical Attestation Type Catalog

C.4 ATT-VAL — Validation Attestation

C.5 ATT-EVD — Evidence Attestation

C.6 ATT-REP — Replay Attestation

C.7 ATT-TRUST — Trust Attestation

C.8 ATT-POL — Policy Attestation

C.9 ATT-GOV — Governance Attestation

C.10 ATT-FED — Federation Attestation

C.11 ATT-DAL — Ledger Attestation

C.12 ATT-AI — AI Governance Attestation

C.13 Attestation Relationships

C.14 Attestation Selection

C.15 Extensibility

C.16 Constitutional Principles

C.17 Summary

APPENDIX D — Assurance Level Reference

D.1 Purpose

D.2 Architectural Principles

D.3 Assurance Level Hierarchy

D.4 Assurance Level Catalog

D.5 AL1 — Computational Assurance

D.6 AL2 — Verified Assurance

D.7 AL3 — Governed Assurance

D.8 AL4 — Federated Assurance

D.9 AL5 — Constitutional Assurance

D.10 Capability Matrix

D.11 Assurance Progression

D.12 Federation Considerations

D.13 Replay Considerations

D.14 Governance

D.15 Constitutional Principles

D.16 Relationship to the ZAYAZ Architecture

D.17 Summary

APPENDIX E — Lifecycle State Reference

E.1 Purpose

E.2 Architectural Principles

E.3 Canonical Lifecycle

E.4 Lifecycle State Catalog

E.5 State Descriptions

E.6 Permitted Lifecycle Transitions

E.7 Lifecycle Invariants

E.8 Relationship to Operational Status

E.9 Replay Considerations

E.10 Federation Considerations

E.11 Relationship to CALM

E.12 Summary

APPENDIX F — Canonical Relationships

F.1 Purpose

F.2 Architectural Principles

F.3 Canonical TrustGate Architecture

F.4 Identity Relationships