Core System Architecture Part 124 — Anonymous Network Requirements Engineering, Specification Lifecycle, Acceptance Criteria, Verification Planning, Change Traceability & Privacy-Preserving Product/Technical Requirement Architecture
SIAR — Secure, Local-First, Multi-Transport Communication Platform
Series: Core System Architecture
Part: 124
Status: Architecture specification
Primary language: Rust
Builds on: Core System Architecture Parts 65, 94–108, 120–123
Primary purpose: define SIAR's requirements-engineering architecture for requirement identity, product and technical specifications, lifecycle, acceptance criteria, verification planning, baselines, change control, traceability, ambiguity/conflict handling, decomposition, release gating, and privacy-preserving requirement governance.
1. Purpose
Requirements become dangerous when they are:
ambiguous
unversioned
untestable
unowned
contradictory
detached from implementation
A mature platform must answer:
What exactly must the system do?
Why does this requirement exist?
How will it be verified?
Which design implements it?
Which tests prove it?
What changes when the requirement changes?
Which release first satisfies it?
The governing principle is:
SIAR requirements should be explicit, versioned, testable, traceable, change-controlled, and linked to verification evidence—without creating behavioral profiling of users or performance scoring of engineers.
2. Architectural Position
NEED / CONSTRAINT
│
▼
REQUIREMENT
│
┌───────────┼───────────┐
│ │ │
PRODUCT TECHNICAL QUALITY
│ │ │
└───────────┼───────────┘
▼
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
│
▼
VERIFICATION PLAN
│
▼
DESIGN / IMPLEMENTATION
│
▼
TEST / RELEASE
3. Core Separation
Keep distinct:
need
requirement
constraint
design decision
acceptance criterion
verification method
test case
implementation
release evidence
4. Non-Goals
Part 124 does not create:
feature-voting surveillance
user behavioral segmentation
developer requirement-completion rankings
vague prose treated as acceptance proof
5. Requirement Identity
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementId(pub [u8; 16]); }
Stable, opaque, never reused.
6. Requirement Class
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementClass { Product, Functional, Security, Privacy, Reliability, Performance, Capacity, Operational, Compatibility, DataGovernance, Maintainability, ComplianceTechnical, } }
7. Product vs Technical Requirement
Product:
what capability/value must exist
Technical:
what system property/constraint must hold
8. Hard rule.
9. Requirement Strength
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementStrength { Must, Should, May, } }
10. Hard Invariant
Some Must requirements are non-waivable.
11. Hard rule.
12. Requirement Record
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct Requirement { pub id: RequirementId, pub class: RequirementClass, pub title: String, pub statement: RequirementStatement, pub strength: RequirementStrength, pub state: RequirementState, } }
13. Requirement State
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementState { Draft, Proposed, Approved, Implementing, Verifying, Satisfied, Deprecated, Superseded, Rejected, } }
14. No Draft→Satisfied Direct
Hard rule.
15. Requirement Statement Pattern
Prefer:
The system SHALL <observable behavior> under <conditions> within <constraint>.
16. Avoid
fast
secure enough
user friendly
scalable
robust
without measurable criteria.
17. Hard rule.
18. Requirement Origin
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementOrigin { ProductNeed, ArchitecturePrinciple, SecurityThreatModel, PrivacyConstraint, ReliabilityObjective, IncidentLearning, EngineeringRisk, CompatibilityNeed, TechnicalComplianceControl, } }
19. Origin Trace
Every approved requirement should have origin.
20. Hard rule.
21. Requirement Owner
Prefer product/service/team owner.
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementOwnerRef { ProductArea(ProductAreaId), Service(ServiceId), PlatformTeam(TeamId), SecurityTeam(TeamId), PrivacyTeam(TeamId), GovernanceBody(GovernanceBodyId), } }
22. No Individual-Blame Ownership
Hard rule.
23. Requirement Scope
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementScope { Platform, Service(ServiceId), Protocol(ProtocolId), ClientPlatform(PlatformClass), Region(RegionId), TenantAggregate(TenantId), } }
24. No Individual User Scope
Hard rule.
25. Requirement Version
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementVersion(pub u64); }
26. Versioned Requirement
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct VersionedRequirement { pub id: RequirementId, pub version: RequirementVersion, pub content_digest: Digest, } }
27. Historical Versions Immutable
Hard rule.
28. Requirement Baseline
Snapshot for release/program increment.
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementBaseline { pub baseline_id: RequirementBaselineId, pub requirements: BTreeMap<RequirementId, RequirementVersion>, } }
29. Baseline Immutable
Hard rule.
30. Product Requirement
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct ProductRequirement { pub requirement: RequirementId, pub capability: ProductCapabilityId, pub acceptance: Vec<AcceptanceCriterionId>, } }
31. Technical Requirement
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct TechnicalRequirement { pub requirement: RequirementId, pub invariant: Option<InvariantId>, pub verification_plan: VerificationPlanId, } }
32. Non-Functional Requirement
Examples:
p99 latency
availability
recovery time
privacy
memory bound
33. Hard rule.
34. Requirement Decomposition
Parent → child.
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementDecomposition { pub parent: RequirementId, pub children: Vec<RequirementId>, } }
35. Child Requirements Must Preserve Parent Intent
Hard rule.
36. No Circular Decomposition
Hard rule.
37. Requirement Dependency
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementDependency { pub from: RequirementId, pub to: RequirementId, pub relation: RequirementDependencyKind, } }
38. Dependency Kind
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementDependencyKind { Requires, ConflictsWith, Refines, Supersedes, } }
39. Hard rule.
40. Requirement Conflict
Conflicts must be explicit.
41. Conflict Record
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementConflict { pub a: RequirementId, pub b: RequirementId, pub state: ConflictState, } }
42. Conflict State
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum ConflictState { Detected, UnderReview, Resolved, AcceptedTradeoff, } }
43. AcceptedTradeoff Requires Decision Record
Hard rule.
44. Ambiguity Detection
Requirement may be marked ambiguous.
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementQualityState { Clear, Ambiguous, Untestable, Conflicting, Incomplete, } }
45. Approved Requires Clear/Testable
Hard rule.
46. Acceptance Criterion
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct AcceptanceCriterion { pub id: AcceptanceCriterionId, pub requirement: RequirementId, pub condition: AcceptanceCondition, pub expected: AcceptanceOutcome, } }
47. Criterion Must Be Observable
Hard rule.
48. Acceptance Types
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum AcceptanceCriterionType { Behavioral, SecurityInvariant, PerformanceThreshold, ReliabilityThreshold, Compatibility, Operational, DataLifecycle, } }
49. Example
Given a persisted outgoing message,
when network connectivity is unavailable,
then the message remains durable locally
and transitions to retryable state without data loss.
50. Good.
51. Acceptance Criterion Strength
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum AcceptanceStrength { Required, Advisory, } }
52. Hard rule.
53. Verification Method
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum VerificationMethod { UnitTest, PropertyTest, FuzzTest, IntegrationTest, EndToEndTest, Benchmark, Simulation, FormalVerification, Inspection, OperationalExercise, } }
54. Verification Plan
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct VerificationPlan { pub id: VerificationPlanId, pub requirement: RequirementId, pub methods: Vec<VerificationMethod>, pub evidence_required: Vec<VerificationEvidenceKind>, } }
55. Hard rule.
56. Verification Evidence Kind
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum VerificationEvidenceKind { TestResult, BenchmarkResult, SimulationResult, FormalProofResult, ReleaseReceipt, DrillReceipt, ArchitectureComplianceReport, } }
57. Satisfied ≠ Implemented
Hard rule.
58. Requirement Satisfaction
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementSatisfactionState { NotImplemented, PartiallyImplemented, ImplementedUnverified, Verified, FailedVerification, } }
59. Verified Is Evidence-Backed
Hard rule.
60. Requirement-to-Code Trace
Part 123.
Requirement
→ ADR/Standard
→ Crate/Module/Symbol
→ Test
→ Release
61. Hard rule.
62. Verification Coverage
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementVerificationCoverage { pub requirement: RequirementId, pub required_methods: usize, pub verified_methods: usize, pub state: TraceHealth, } }
63. No Misleading Percent Without Scope
Hard rule.
64. Security Requirement
Must link:
threat/control
implementation
verification
65. Hard rule.
66. Privacy Requirement
Must link:
data-flow constraint
implementation
retention/deletion/access tests
67. Hard rule.
68. Reliability Requirement
Must link:
SLO/resilience model
implementation
simulation/drill/test
69. Hard rule.
70. Performance Requirement
Must specify:
metric
percentile
load model
environment
71. Hard rule.
72. Capacity Requirement
Must specify:
resource
headroom
failure scenario
forecast horizon
73. Hard rule.
74. Operational Requirement
Must specify:
operator action
conditions
expected outcome
recovery path
75. Hard rule.
76. Compatibility Requirement
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct CompatibilityRequirement { pub protocol_version: VersionRange, pub client_version: VersionRange, pub migration_window: Duration, } }
77. Hard rule.
78. Requirement Change
Requirement changes are governed.
79. Change Request
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementChangeRequest { pub id: RequirementChangeId, pub requirement: RequirementId, pub from_version: RequirementVersion, pub proposed_statement: RequirementStatement, pub rationale: ChangeRationale, } }
80. Change State
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementChangeState { Draft, ImpactAnalysis, Review, Approved, Rejected, Applied, } }
81. No Applied Without Impact Analysis
Hard rule.
82. Impact Analysis
Part 123.
Requirement change identifies:
ADRs
standards
code
tests
releases
deployments
risks
83. Hard rule.
84. Impact Report
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementChangeImpact { pub requirement: RequirementId, pub affected_nodes: Vec<KnowledgeNodeId>, pub risks: Vec<EngineeringRiskId>, } }
85. Hard rule.
86. Requirement Change Approval
Authority depends on class/scope.
87. Security/privacy hard requirement changes require specialized review.
88. Hard rule.
89. Requirement Supersession
New version may supersede old.
90. Historical release keeps old baseline.
91. Hard rule.
92. Requirement Deprecation
Deprecated requirement remains historical.
93. Replacement recommended.
94. Hard rule.
95. Acceptance Criteria Change
Must trigger verification-plan review.
96. Hard rule.
97. Verification Plan Change
May not silently weaken mandatory method.
98. Hard rule.
99. Requirement Review
Triggers:
incident
risk
architecture change
protocol change
platform change
regulatory technical requirement change
100. Hard rule.
101. Review Cadence
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementReviewCadence { Quarterly, SemiAnnual, Annual, EventDriven, } }
102. High-risk requirements more frequent.
103. Hard rule.
104. Requirement Freshness
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementFreshness { Fresh, DueForReview, Stale, } }
105. Stale ≠ Invalid
Hard rule.
106. Requirement Assumption
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementAssumption { pub requirement: RequirementId, pub statement: AssumptionStatement, pub expires_at: Option<Timestamp>, } }
107. Assumption Changes Trigger Review
Hard rule.
108. Requirement Constraint
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementConstraint { pub requirement: RequirementId, pub constraint: ConstraintKind, } }
109. Constraint Kind
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum ConstraintKind { Security, Privacy, Residency, Compatibility, Resource, Platform, Dependency, } }
110. Hard rule.
111. Product Requirement Discovery
Sources:
explicit product goals
support pain points
operational needs
technical constraints
112. No behavioral surveillance baseline.
113. Hard rule.
114. User Research Boundary
Product requirements may use voluntary research or explicit feedback.
115. Do not infer hidden personal traits/behavior profiles into requirements.
116. Hard rule.
117. Requirement Prioritization
Use:
criticality
security/privacy
reliability
dependency
delivery sequencing
118. No user-value scoring by sensitive personal category.
119. Hard rule.
120. Requirement Priority
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementPriority { Critical, High, Medium, Low, } }
121. Priority Must Reference Rationale
Hard rule.
122. MVP Requirement
Can mark delivery phase.
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum DeliveryPhase { Foundation, V1, PostV1, Optional, } }
123. Hard rule.
124. Requirement Set
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementSet { pub id: RequirementSetId, pub requirements: BTreeSet<RequirementId>, pub baseline: RequirementBaselineId, } }
125. Use For
release
feature
protocol
migration
126. Hard rule.
127. Release Requirement Gate
Part 108.
Release checks:
required requirements approved
implementation linked
verification passed
exceptions valid
128. Hard rule.
129. Release Requirement Report
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct ReleaseRequirementReport { pub release: ReleaseId, pub baseline: RequirementBaselineId, pub unsatisfied: Vec<RequirementId>, pub unverified: Vec<RequirementId>, } }
130. Hard rule.
131. No Release Satisfaction By Ticket Status
Hard rule.
132. Change Integration
Part 107.
Change references requirement IDs.
133. Hard rule.
134. Architecture Governance Integration
Part 122.
Requirement influences ADR/standard.
135. Hard rule.
136. Knowledge Graph Integration
Part 123.
All requirement traces queryable.
137. Hard rule.
138. Risk Integration
Part 121.
Risk can create requirement.
139. Requirement can mitigate risk.
140. Hard rule.
141. PIR Integration
Part 120.
Incident lesson can create/strengthen requirement.
142. Hard rule.
143. SLO Integration
Part 109.
Reliability requirement may map to SLO.
144. Hard rule.
145. Resilience Integration
Part 110.
Failure-survival requirements map to fault-domain simulations.
146. Hard rule.
147. Capacity Integration
Part 111.
Capacity requirement maps to forecast/headroom evidence.
148. Hard rule.
149. Performance Integration
Part 112.
Latency/throughput requirements map to benchmark evidence.
150. Hard rule.
151. Efficiency/Sustainability Integration
Parts 113–114.
Resource/energy requirements remain subordinate to hard security/privacy/reliability constraints.
152. Hard rule.
153. Hardware/Facility Integration
Parts 115–118.
Physical requirements map to site/fleet controls/tests.
154. Hard rule.
155. Crisis Command Integration
Part 119.
Emergency requirements specify authority and fallback behavior.
156. Hard rule.
157. Compliance Technical Requirements
Represent technical implementation obligations only.
158. Legal interpretation stays outside core.
159. Hard rule.
160. Requirement Exception
Some non-hard requirements can have exception.
161. Exception Record
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub struct RequirementException { pub requirement: RequirementId, pub rationale: ExceptionRationale, pub expires_at: Timestamp, pub compensating_controls: Vec<ControlId>, } }
162. Hard Requirements Non-Waivable
Hard rule.
163. Exception Expiry
Automatic.
164. Hard rule.
165. Verification Waiver
Never allowed for hard invariants.
166. Hard rule.
167. Requirement Conflict Resolution
Possible outcomes:
change one requirement
scope requirements differently
accept explicit tradeoff
reject one requirement
168. Hard rule.
169. Tradeoff Decision
Requires ADR/design review.
170. Hard rule.
171. Requirement Quality Gate
Before approval:
clear
bounded
testable
owned
origin known
acceptance criteria present
verification plan present
172. Hard rule.
173. Requirement Linter
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub trait RequirementLintService { fn evaluate( &self, requirement: &Requirement, ) -> Result<Vec<RequirementLintFinding>, RequirementsError>; } }
174. Lint Finding
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementLintFinding { AmbiguousLanguage, MissingAcceptanceCriteria, MissingVerificationPlan, MissingOwner, MissingOrigin, NonMeasurableThreshold, ConflictingRequirement, } }
175. Hard rule.
176. Machine-Enforceable Validation
Where possible:
schema
enum
threshold
trace requirement
177. Hard rule.
178. Human Review
For semantics/tradeoffs.
179. Hard rule.
180. Requirement Authoring Format
Preferred:
Markdown prose
RON metadata
Postcard compiled runtime policy where relevant
181. Hard rule.
182. Requirement Metadata RON Example
(
id: "REQ-REL-042",
class: "Reliability",
strength: "Must",
owner: "service:messaging",
acceptance: ["AC-042-1", "AC-042-2"],
)
183. Human-reviewable.
184. Hard rule.
185. Requirement Registry Service
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub trait RequirementRegistry { fn get( &self, id: RequirementId, ) -> Result<Requirement, RequirementsError>; fn baseline( &self, id: RequirementBaselineId, ) -> Result<RequirementBaseline, RequirementsError>; } }
186. Requirement Change Service
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub trait RequirementChangeService { fn propose( &self, change: RequirementChangeRequest, ) -> Result<RequirementChangeId, RequirementsError>; fn apply( &self, change: RequirementChangeId, ) -> Result<RequirementVersion, RequirementsError>; } }
187. Verification Service
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub trait RequirementVerificationService { fn evaluate( &self, requirement: RequirementId, release: ReleaseId, ) -> Result<RequirementSatisfactionState, RequirementsError>; } }
188. Trace Service
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub trait RequirementImpactService { fn impact( &self, requirement: RequirementId, ) -> Result<RequirementChangeImpact, RequirementsError>; } }
189. No People-Analytics API
Hard rule.
190. Error Taxonomy
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub enum RequirementsError { RequirementUnknown, InvalidStateTransition, AmbiguousRequirement, MissingAcceptanceCriteria, MissingVerificationPlan, VerificationFailed, ConflictUnresolved, ImpactAnalysisRequired, ExceptionNotAllowed, ExceptionExpired, BaselineMismatch, ScopeViolation, Unauthorized, Internal, } }
191. Observability
Safe metrics:
requirements by state
stale requirements
unverified critical requirements
broken traces
open conflicts
192. Forbidden:
requirements completed per developer
rejections per author
user-behavior requirement analytics
193. Hard rule.
194. Requirements SLOs
Examples:
critical approved requirement has acceptance + verification plan
release has no unverified hard requirement
requirement change impact analysis completed before approval
195. Security SLO
0 hard security requirement waived
0 hard requirement marked satisfied without verification evidence
196. Privacy SLO
0 user behavioral profiling used as hidden requirement input
0 engineer productivity scoring from requirement metadata
197. Failure Modes
ambiguous requirement approved
test does not verify intended behavior
requirement changes without trace propagation
release satisfies old requirement accidentally
198. Ambiguous Requirement
Blocks approval.
199. Hard rule.
200. Weak Test Mapping
Verification plan reviewed.
201. Hard rule.
202. Unpropagated Change
Impact-analysis gate blocks application.
203. Hard rule.
204. Baseline Drift
Release pins explicit requirement baseline.
205. Hard rule.
206. Testing
Need requirements-engineering testkit.
207. Test Scenarios
new privacy requirement
performance threshold change
requirement supersession
release verification
conflicting requirements
208. State Test
Invalid lifecycle transition rejected.
209. Quality Test
Ambiguous text blocks approval.
210. Acceptance Test
Missing acceptance criterion blocks approval.
211. Verification Test
Implemented but unverified remains unsatisfied.
212. Conflict Test
Unresolved conflict blocks affected baseline.
213. Baseline Test
Historical release retains historical requirement version.
214. Change Test
Requirement change propagates impact analysis.
215. Exception Test
Hard invariant cannot be waived.
216. Trace Test
Deleted implementation breaks requirement trace.
217. Privacy Test
No user/employee dimension accepted.
218. Fuzzing
Fuzz:
requirement lifecycle
baseline manifests
acceptance criteria
change requests
exception records
219. Property Tests
Properties:
hard requirement can never reach Satisfied without verification evidence
approved requirement can never lack acceptance criteria and verification plan
historical requirement baseline can never mutate after release
individual user or employee identity can never become a requirement analytics dimension
220. Formal Verification Targets
Strong candidates:
requirement lifecycle
baseline immutability
change impact gating
exception expiry
221. Kani Candidate
state/waiver/verification invariants.
222. TLA+ Candidate
draft → approve → implement → verify → baseline → change → supersede.
223. Loom Candidate
concurrent requirement change + release baseline creation + verification update.
224. Performance
Requirements governance is control-plane/offline work.
225. Release gate queries indexed state.
226. Hard rule.
227. Storage
Separate:
requirements
versions
baselines
acceptance criteria
verification plans
change requests
exceptions
conflicts
228. No user/employee analytics warehouse.
229. Hard rule.
230. Partitioning
By:
requirement class
service
protocol
release
baseline
231. No person/user partition.
232. Hard rule.
233. Crate Layout
Recommended:
crates/
├── siar-requirements-core/
├── siar-requirement-registry/
├── siar-requirement-quality/
├── siar-acceptance-criteria/
├── siar-verification-planning/
├── siar-requirement-change/
├── siar-requirement-baseline/
├── siar-requirement-trace/
├── siar-requirement-observability/
└── siar-requirement-testkit/
234. siar-requirements-core
Owns:
RequirementId
RequirementClass
RequirementState
RequirementsError
235. siar-requirement-registry
Requirement/version/origin/ownership storage.
236. siar-requirement-quality
Ambiguity/conflict/testability checks.
237. siar-acceptance-criteria
Observable outcome definitions.
238. siar-verification-planning
Verification method/evidence policy.
239. siar-requirement-change
Change request/impact/approval.
240. siar-requirement-baseline
Immutable release/program requirement snapshots.
241. siar-requirement-trace
Integration with Part 123 knowledge graph.
242. siar-requirement-observability
Aggregate requirement health only.
243. siar-requirement-testkit
lifecycle/baseline/trace/privacy tests.
244. Security, Privacy & Correctness Invariants
Mandatory:
1. Requirements are scoped to products, services, protocols, platforms, regions, tenants, and system properties—not to individual users, employee performance, or behavioral profiles.
2. Requirement needs, design decisions, acceptance criteria, verification plans, tests, implementations, and release evidence remain distinct artifacts linked explicitly through traceability.
3. Every approved requirement is versioned, owned, sourced, clear, testable, and has acceptance criteria and a verification plan; ambiguity or unresolved conflict blocks approval.
4. Historical requirement versions and release baselines are immutable; later requirement changes never rewrite what an older release was required to satisfy.
5. Hard security/privacy/reliability requirements are non-waivable, and a requirement cannot reach Satisfied merely because implementation code exists—verification evidence is mandatory.
6. Requirement changes require impact analysis across ADRs, standards, code, tests, releases, deployments, risks, and exceptions before application.
7. Acceptance criteria define observable outcomes and cannot rely on vague qualities such as "fast", "secure", or "robust" without measurable context.
8. Requirement conflicts and tradeoffs are explicit and resolved through architecture/design governance rather than hidden inside implementation choices.
9. Product requirement discovery may use explicit research and operational evidence but cannot rely on covert behavioral profiling, sensitive-personal inference, or user-surveillance datasets.
10. Requirement governance metrics track technical lifecycle, verification, conflicts, baselines, and trace health and cannot become developer productivity, author rejection, or individual performance scoring.
11. Release and change gates use pinned requirement baselines and verified satisfaction state so ticket completion or implementation presence alone cannot claim compliance.
12. Requirements engineering integrates with architecture governance, engineering knowledge, risk/PIR, SLOs, resilience, capacity, performance, hardware/facility controls, compliance, audit, change, and release governance without creating an alternate authority or surveillance path.
245. Initial Production Scope
Implement first:
typed RequirementId/RequirementClass/RequirementState
product vs technical requirement model
requirement origin/owner/scope
versioning
immutable requirement baselines
requirement quality linting
acceptance criteria
verification plans
satisfaction states
requirement decomposition/dependencies/conflicts
change requests
impact analysis
exception rules
release baseline/gate integration
architecture/risk/PIR traceability
privacy-safe requirement dashboards
requirements testkit
Then add:
controlled natural-language requirement linting
automatic ambiguity hints
formal requirement consistency checks
cross-repository implementation trace
AI-assisted candidate acceptance criteria
temporal baseline diff
machine-generated verification-plan suggestions with human approval
246. Definition of Done
Part 124 is complete when:
- requirements are typed/versioned/scoped;
- product and technical requirements are distinct;
- acceptance criteria are mandatory for approval;
- verification plans are mandatory;
- historical baselines are immutable;
- hard requirements cannot be waived;
- implemented does not imply satisfied;
- change impact propagation exists;
- conflicts/ambiguity block approval;
- releases pin requirement baselines;
- requirement traces integrate with Part 123;
- no user/developer profiling is created;
- lifecycle/baseline/trace/privacy/fuzz/formal tests are specified.
247. Final Architecture
NEED / CONSTRAINT
│
▼
REQUIREMENT
│
┌────────────┼────────────┐
│ │ │
PRODUCT TECHNICAL QUALITY
│ │ │
└────────────┼────────────┘
▼
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
│
▼
VERIFICATION PLAN
│
▼
DESIGN / IMPLEMENTATION
│
▼
TEST / EVIDENCE
│
▼
RELEASE BASELINE
Requirements-engineering safety model:
versioned requirements
+
clear acceptance criteria
+
verification planning
+
immutable baselines
+
change impact analysis
+
traceability
+
release gating
+
privacy/blame safeguards
not:
write vague feature prose, treat merged code as proof, change requirements without impact analysis, and rank developers by requirement throughput
248. Final Principle
A requirement is only useful when everyone can tell exactly what it means, what implements it, and what evidence proves it.
The correct model is:
state the need clearly
+
classify and scope it
+
define acceptance
+
plan verification
+
trace implementation
+
pin baselines
+
govern changes
+
verify before claiming satisfaction
+
never turn requirements into user or engineer surveillance
This architecture gives SIAR a privacy-preserving requirements-engineering foundation for product/technical specifications, acceptance criteria, verification planning, baselines, change traceability, release gating, and requirement lifecycle governance while preserving the anonymity, local-first, least-authority, architecture-governance, engineering-knowledge, and anti-surveillance guarantees established across Parts 34–123.