Explanation
Maturity and evidence labels
Pinega treats claim status as part of the technical contract. A reader should be able to tell whether a statement describes an available artefact, an accepted decision, a validated model, an active research question, or a hypothesis awaiting evidence.
Maturity describes what exists
- Available
- A runnable or inspectable repository artefact exists.
- Design contract
- A boundary or model is documented and validated as a contract/specimen; production implementation may still be incomplete.
- Research
- The direction is actively investigated and may change with evidence.
- Decision
- A project direction is accepted until explicitly superseded by later evidence or a later decision.
Evidence describes why a claim is being made
Research artefacts should distinguish sourced claims, background, inference, hypotheses, and user/project ideas. The Web evidence component similarly communicates semantic kinds such as confirmed, inferred, hypothesis, external evidence, and contradicted without relying on colour alone.
Page purpose is orthogonal to maturity
A how-to page can be Available because its commands work today. An architecture explanation can be a Design contract because the boundary is accepted while production code is incomplete. A reference page can document a Decision if it is describing a fixed project contract.
This is why the documentation registry stores both documentation.purpose and maturity_status instead of overloading one field.
Promotion requires evidence
Public copy must not silently move a result from research to validated capability or from validated capability to shipped product. Promotion should follow the research-to-product workflow and be reflected in source, tests, metadata, and review artefacts together.