2.5.2 Tool-Driven Interpretations

Return to 2.5 Why a Reference Architecture Is Needed

In many current reporting-system implementations, semantic interpretation remains implicitly embedded within tools, platforms, configurations, models, or application logic rather than being defined as an explicit architectural responsibility.

As a result, meaning becomes tightly coupled to specific technologies, execution environments, vendor products, or implementation-specific configurations.

When organizations upgrade, reconfigure, replace, or integrate tools, interpretive behavior may change subtly and without adequate documentation. Such changes may alter:

Classification outcomesValidation resultsDerived factsCalculated metricsConfidence assessmentsConformance determinationsThese changes may occur without any corresponding revision to reporting standards, semantic definitions, regulatory intent, or governing policy. Because the semantic behavior remains implicit within the implementation, organizations may find such changes difficult to detect, compare, explain, reproduce, or govern.

This coupling of semantic intent to tool-specific realization constitutes an architectural failure mode. It:

Undermines comparability across implementationsComplicates oversight and auditObscures the authority governing an interpretationMakes historical reconstruction difficultIncreases dependence on particular vendors or execution environmentsWeakens the ability to determine whether different systems interpret the same reported information consistentlyThese problems may persist even when systems nominally use the same reporting formats, taxonomies, standards, or source data.

A Reference Architecture is therefore needed to separate semantic intent from its technological realization. The architecture makes interpretive responsibilities, definitions, rules, parameters, version context, and outcomes explicit and traceable independently of the technologies used to execute them.

This separation allows semantic behavior to remain stable, governable, inspectable, and reconstructable across:

Heterogeneous toolsEvolving platformsVendor changesIndependently developed systemsMultiple reporting periodsDiffering deployment environmentsThe Federated Data Interpretation Systems Reference Architecture (FDIS-RA) supports this separation without constraining implementation choice, product selection, technical innovation, or deployment strategy.

© 2026 Dido Solutions, Inc. and Jackrabbit Consulting, Inc.