Implementation Semantics

Go up to Terms and Definitions

Discussion

Implementation semantics defines meaning through executable artefacts, deployed configurations, runtime behaviour, database constraints, message handlers, validation functions, policy enforcement points, and system operations.

Implementation artefacts express semantic content when their behaviour preserves traceability to the defined domain meaning. That meaning comes from authoritative semantic sources such as semantics, conceptual models, schemas, type systems, rules, policies, ontologies, reports, and conformance criteria.

Implementation semantics differs from conceptual semantics. Conceptual semantics defines meaning before an architecture selects implementation technology. Implementation semantics expresses selected meaning through runtime behaviour and technical artefacts.

Implementation semantics also differ from implementation details. Implementation detail describes how a system performs work. Implementation semantics identifies what the implemented behaviour means with respect to the governed architecture.

Implementation semantic content includes:

Executable codeRuntime logicConfiguration filesDatabase constraintsValidation functionsMessage handlersEvent handlersapi behaviourDDS topic behaviourPolicy enforcement pointsAccess-control decisionsTransformation rulesSerialisation and deserialization logicError handlingLogging behaviourConformance test outcomesTraceability to semantic sourcesA governed architecture prevents implementation behaviour from becoming the hidden source of meaning. The architecture defines the meaning first; implementation artefacts then express, enforce, validate, or operationalise that meaning.

Definition

meaning expressed through executable artefacts, deployed configurations, runtime behaviour, and technical constraints within an implementation context

Source

DIDO Solutions' usage is informed by software architecture, model-driven architecture, semantic traceability, validation practices, and conformance testing practices.

Note

Implementation semantics does not replace conceptual semantics. Implementation semantics expresses selected conceptual, schema, type, rule, policy, report, or ontology meaning in executable or deployed form. A governed implementation preserves traceability from runtime behaviour to the semantic source that establishes the intended meaning.

Example

An FX Demo implementation receives a proposed trade message and executes validation logic before committing the trade state.

Implementation artefact	Behaviour	Semantic source	Implementation semantic meaning
Trade message parser	Reads tradeDate, settlementDate, counterpartyLEI, and notionalAmount	FX trade schema and conceptual model	The parser recognises the message fields as trade information elements, not as arbitrary data
Date validation function	Rejects a confirmed trade when settlementDate precedes tradeDate	FX trade lifecycle rule	The implementation enforces the meaning of a valid confirmed trade lifecycle
LEI validation function	Rejects a trade when counterpartyLEI lacks a valid LEI format	LEI type and validation rule	The implementation treats the value as a legal entity identifier, not as a generic string
Commit guard	Accepts a state transition only when the predecessor state identifier matches the current committed state	lifecycle semantics and state-transition rule	The implementation preserves the meaning of ordered trade-state progression
Audit log writer	Records validation result, timestamp, validator identifier, and rejection reason	Conformance semantics and governance policy	The implementation creates evidence of the semantic decision

The implementation semantics do not come from the code alone. The code expresses meaning because each implemented behaviour traces to a governed semantic source. Without that traceability, the runtime behaviour becomes an undocumented interpretation of the domain.

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