Verification checklist

Completeness

• There is an information definition. 
• The information definition covers all of the information that is exchanged between the actors. 

Notes:

1. The information definition can be a standalone document or embedded into another document such as a service description
2. The information definition can be made up of a set of documents. This is common practice when designing XML schemas.

Correctness

• The information definition is written in English.
• The information definition uses the primary British spelling when conflicting spellings of a word exist.

Completeness

• The information definition has a title.
• The information definition has an edition.
• The information definition has a reference date.

Completeness

• The information definition contains the name of the responsible person or organisation.
• The information definition contains contact information for the responsible party.
• The information definition contains the role played by the responsible party.

Completeness

• The information definition has a textual description of the scope of the information covered by the information definition.
• The scope clearly delineates what is covered by the information definition.

Completeness

• The information definition declares a dedicated namespace for its concepts.

Completeness

• The information definition contains a name for each of its information concepts and data concepts. 
• The information definition contains a definition for each of its information concepts and data concepts.
• The information definition contains a data type for each of its data concepts.

Consistency

• The concepts within the information definition are consistent i.e. that concepts do not contradict each other or their reference material.
• There are no duplicated concepts in the same namespace within the information definition.

Correctness

• Each concept's name, definition and data type are correct i.e. that they actually represent what they should.

Completeness

either:

• Each concept has a unique identifiers in accordance with IETF RFC 3986.

or

• Each concept can be uniquely identified through some other mechanism e.g. by being uniquely named in a namespace.

Consistency

• The information definition uses definitions that are consistent with the AIRM when the concept's name is the same as that in the AIRM.

Correctness

• The information definition has applied the principles for definitions for each of its concepts.

Consistency

• The definitions of the metadata fields in the information definition are consistent (not contradictory) with the AIRM's metadata standard.

Consistency

• The information definition’s basic data types do not contradict those in the AIRM.

Completeness

• The information definition has a semantic correspondence statement for each concept.

Completeness

• Each semantic correspondence statements contains one of the four options allowed by the specification.

Completeness

• Each semantic correspondence declaring that a concept in an information definition is out-of-scope of the AIRM has a rationale.
• Each semantic correspondence declaring that no semantic correspondence has been established has a rationale.

Correctness

• Each trace from the information concept in the information definition to the AIRM concept that has an equivalent or wider meaning is correct.

Correctness

• Each trace from the data concept in the information definition to the AIRM concept that has an equivalent or wider meaning is correct.
• Each trace to the data type in the AIRM that has an equivalent or wider meaning is correct.

Correctness

• Each additional trace to AIRM concepts to fully describe the narrowing of the concept being mapped is correct.

Correctness

• Each trace in the information definition use the unique identifier provided by the AIRM concept at its end-point.