Dataspace and interoperability

The program speaks the neighboring standards rather than replacing them: its federation machinery maps onto the planes the dataspace standards name, and its models export to the formats the requirements-management and linked-data ecosystems already consume. The starting point is the committee’s adopted text, so every interop artifact is a projection outward from an authoritative model, never a competing source. The program also builds on open work rather than inventing its own: the models are authored in Primmel (the open language developed by Ribose, adopted by OIML SMART), and the certificate’s trust chain is Signatif (the CalConnect standard), so the two supporting technologies underneath this page are both open, named, and inspectable.

Read the interop chapter →

What it does today

• Maps its planes onto the dataspace vocabulary. Identity, data, policy, and catalog are named in dataspace terms below, aligned with the Dataspace Protocol (under standardization as ISO/IEC 20151), ODRL 2.2, and the IDS Reference Architecture Model.
• Serves the certificate to neighboring ecosystems today. The demo’s certificate answers as a W3C Verifiable Credential, an SD-JWT, a DPP conformity attestation, and an AAS submodel; the CNML page carries the four live links with their honest caveat (the demo’s nightly reseed can leave the certificate awaiting its signing pass).
• Exports the models, generated never authored. ReqIF requirement rows (the DIN DKE SPEC 99200 profile, validated against the official OMG schema), RDF/OWL with SHACL shapes (the IEC-ISO Core Ontology projection, machine-checked), and OpenCDD back-references, each stating what it carries and what it leaves behind.
• Keeps custody with the parties. An evaluation’s evidence stays with its laboratory, the decision with its authority, the register with the BIML; evidence moves between instances under declared policy, never into a central data lake.
• Serves the catalog edge. The catalog endpoint is the shipping edge of this work: each instance serves its offered artifact classes with their policy offers.

How it works

The program’s machinery names its planes in dataspace terms:

Policies are Primmel’s own primitives: the semantics are self-contained in the model, and ODRL and the Dataspace Protocol are their exported expressions on the wire. The contract-negotiation lifecycle and the conformance-suite legs are roadmap items in the dataspace program, tracked in the platform repository.

The alignment positions

Digital Product Passport. The passport is a projection of the product model plus its live instance state, served by the instrument’s endpoint under access classes. The CEN/CENELEC JTC24 framework’s eight standardization areas are mapped area by area as authored, gated data: each area is either answered by the frame’s primitives or named as a gap, and a gap left unnamed fails the gate.

Asset Administration Shell. A SMART twin reads as an AAS submodel to an AAS consumer, and the program adopts the shell concept, the property/operation duality, and derived submodel skeletons. The difference is governance: a submodel’s content is whatever its vendor wrote, while a SMART twin’s projection is declared by the standard, identical across conforming instruments, carrying freshness semantics and standing behind a certification verdict. The demo’s certificate already serves the LegalMetrologyConformity submodel form.

Today (SMART) and the vision (SMART+)

Why it exists

Certification data does not live in one organization. An evaluation’s evidence belongs to a laboratory, the decision to an authority, the register to the BIML, and the instrument’s service record to its owner. A central data lake would ask every party to surrender custody; a dataspace lets each party keep custody and exchange under declared policy. Interoperability is therefore a governance property first and a wire format second.

Who may use it, and who may run it

The dataspace surface ships inside the platform, so its determination is the platform’s, quoted from the program’s single entitlement source: the hosted service first, then the self-host software. The Corresponding Member cell on the second row carries the path upward, the ratification narrative on the full matrix page.

The honest questions

Is this a competing trust framework? No. The identity plane is the program’s own identity service and trust registry, and the certificate’s trust chain is an open CalConnect standard (Signatif). The dataspace work names the program’s machinery in the dataspace vocabulary precisely so no parallel framework accretes.

Why generate exports instead of standardizing on ReqIF or RDF? Because the exports are projections: they carry what the format can hold and say what they leave behind. Round-trip is deliberately not a goal, because information lost on the way out cannot come back, so nothing is re-imported into the kernel. The model stays the single source; the exports regenerate on every build.

What does a dataspace buy a member state over a portal? Custody. A portal centralizes the evidence; a dataspace leaves the laboratory’s evidence with the laboratory and the authority’s decision with the authority, and exchanges under declared, machine-checkable policy. Sovereignty is the architecture, not a promise.

Try it, read it, talk to us