| Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision |
| dido:01-fdis-ra:01-introduction:01-4-scope:start [2026/07/11 11:07] – ↷ Links adapted because of a move operation nick_dido | dido:01-fdis-ra:01-introduction:01-4-scope:start [2026/07/18 12:33] (current) – external edit 127.0.0.1 |
|---|
| This section defines the scope of the Federated Data Interpretation Systems Reference Architecture (FDIS-RA) by identifying the classes of architectural concerns, system responsibilities, and standards-related considerations addressed by this specification, as well as those intentionally excluded. | This section defines the scope of the Federated Data Interpretation Systems Reference Architecture (FDIS-RA) by identifying the classes of architectural concerns, system responsibilities, and standards-related considerations addressed by this specification, as well as those intentionally excluded. |
| |
| The scope operates at the architectural level. It focuses on responsibilities, component interactions, interfaces, and the treatment and governance of [[fxdemo:dido_99_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:s:semantic|semantic]] meaning rather than on specific technologies, products, platforms, or implementations. | The scope operates at the architectural level. It focuses on responsibilities, component interactions, interfaces, and the treatment and governance of [[dido:99_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:s:semantic|semantic]] meaning rather than on specific technologies, products, platforms, or implementations. |
| |
| The [[fxdemo:dido_99_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:r:reference_architecture|Reference Architecture]] addresses concerns common to environments that operate downstream of regulated data submission and intake processes. These environments include systems that support agency-specific implementation of the [[fxdemo:dido_99_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:f:fdta|Financial Data Transparency Act (FDTA)]] joint data standards after an implementing agency applies those standards to a specific data collection. | The [[dido:99_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:r:reference_architecture|Reference Architecture]] addresses concerns common to environments that operate downstream of regulated data submission and intake processes. These environments include systems that support agency-specific implementation of the [[dido:99_annexes:annex-b-terms-and-definitions:f:fdta|Financial Data Transparency Act (FDTA)]] joint data standards after an implementing agency applies those standards to a specific data collection. |
| |
| Such environments interpret, validate, compare, and analyse reported data to support regulatory oversight, supervision, longitudinal analysis, and related institutional responsibilities. An environment may operate within a single organisation or span multiple agencies, jurisdictions, and independently governed systems. Implementations may use heterogeneous technologies while preserving common architectural responsibilities and governed boundaries. | Such environments interpret, validate, compare, and analyze reported data to support regulatory oversight, supervision, longitudinal analysis, and related institutional responsibilities. An environment may operate within a single organization or span multiple agencies, jurisdictions, and independently governed systems. Implementations may use heterogeneous technologies while preserving common architectural responsibilities and governed boundaries. |
| |
| FDIS-RA does not determine which FDTA joint standards an agency applies to a particular collection of information. It does not replace agency-specific rulemaking, alter reporting obligations, or assign legal effect to interpreted data. Instead, it provides an architectural framework for systems that implement, govern, and assess interpretation after the appropriate authority establishes the applicable reporting and data-standard requirements. | FDIS-RA does not determine which FDTA joint standards an agency applies to a particular collection of information. It does not replace agency-specific rulemaking, alter reporting obligations, or assign legal effect to interpreted data. Instead, it provides an architectural framework for systems that implement, govern, and assess interpretation after the appropriate authority establishes the applicable reporting and data-standard requirements. |