The taxonomy of semantics identifies where meaning appears in DIDO Solutions work. The taxonomy supports analysis, discussion, traceability, and governance. It does not require every project to create a separate artifact for every kind of semantics.
The taxonomy helps architects identify which semantic concerns apply to a given project, which artifacts express those concerns, and which source governs the intended meaning.
DIDO Solutions uses this taxonomy to prevent the common collapse of semantics into ontology, RDF, or OWL. Those artifacts and technologies play important roles, but they represent only some forms of semantic content.
The taxonomy provides a classification scheme for discussing, tracing, governing, and implementing meaning across DIDO Solutions efforts. It does not define separate project phases or mandatory deliverables.
Semantic concerns often overlap. A single artifact expresses several kinds of semantics at the same time. For example, a JSON Schema for an FX trade message expresses schema semantics through field structure, datatype semantics through date and decimal constraints, type semantics through domain-specific identifiers, and rule semantics through validation constraints.
Examples of overlap include:
A project selects the semantic concerns that matter for its scope, risk, stakeholders, and implementation context. A small demonstration often uses terminology, conceptual semantics, schema semantics, and implementation semantics. A governed financial reporting system often uses report semantics, policy semantics, rule semantics, conformance semantics, lifecycle semantics, type semantics, datatype semantics, and traceability to FIBO, SBRM, or other authoritative sources.
The taxonomy, therefore, provides a map of semantic concerns, not a required work breakdown structure.
The following semantic categories occur under this taxonomy.
© 2026 Dido Solutions, Inc. and Jackrabbit Consulting, Inc.