Implementation Roadmap

System05 Standards and Specifications shall become authoritative only through defined review and approval processes.

Approval shall verify that the document:

has a clearly defined scope;

uses controlled terminology;

identifies normative requirements;

remains constitutionally aligned;

states applicability and exclusions;

defines required Evidence;

supports verification and Conformance assessment;

addresses Versioning and transition;

has received appropriate domain review;

records unresolved limitations;

identifies the approving authority.

Standards and Specifications shall distinguish mandatory provisions from recommendations, examples, commentary, and reference implementations.

Approval thresholds shall correspond to technical significance. A global Interface Specification shall require broader and more independent review than a local implementation guide.

Consensus should be pursued, but approval shall not depend on unanimous agreement where a competent authority determines that outstanding objections have been adequately evaluated.

No document shall gain normative authority solely through publication, widespread use, marketplace adoption, software implementation, or reference in a contract.

Provisional, experimental, draft, candidate, released, deprecated, suspended, and withdrawn documents shall remain clearly distinguishable.

The approval record shall identify:

exact document and Version;

reviewers and conflicts;

Evidence considered;

voting or decision outcome;

dissenting positions;

effective date;

transition requirements;

maintenance responsibility.

Substantive changes after approval shall require renewed review. Editorial corrections shall not be used to introduce new requirements.

Withdrawn or superseded documents shall remain available where required to interpret existing Buildings, Products, certifications, or historical decisions.