Archive notes: recording event origin
Event origin entries in the record prioritise direct observation and durable markers. Each origin entry captures a concise identifier for the initiating artefact, the carrier where the first trace is preserved, and the immediate environmental properties that were recorded at the moment of capture. Environmental properties may include device or system identifiers, the capture method, proximate records that share the same time window, and any handwritten or machine-generated annotations that accompanied the artefact. Where precise timestamps are not available, the record stores a bounded interval with a note of uncertainty and the evidence used to bound that interval. The entry format ensures that future readers can distinguish primary recorded facts from later interpretive annotations, because annotations themselves include provenance metadata that documents who added the annotation and when. This approach lets the archived origin act as a stable anchor for subsequent linking and reconstruction activities, while preserving the chain of evidence that supports attribution decisions.
Method update: anchoring and annotation provenance
Anchors are recorded as structured descriptors to support reproducible matching across repositories. A recent method snapshot documents a practice for preserving annotation provenance: when an explanatory note is added to an existing entry, the annotator records a minimal provenance header including the annotator role, the date of annotation, and whether the note is a transcription, an observation, or an interpretive comment. The header is stored alongside the annotation as an immutable metadata tuple. This practice reduces ambiguity when later readers compare anchors across time and teams. The snapshot explains how to store anchor fields without overwriting original entries, and how to surface anchor provenance in query views so that users can filter annotation layers by provenance type. The method notes include examples of structured anchor fields and how they are indexed for comparison in cross-repository reconciliation tasks. The description remains descriptive: it documents the step-by-step capture process and the provenance captured for each annotation.
Linkage rule note: versioning and auditability
Linkage rules are expressed in plain language and structured notation and are versioned to preserve auditability. A concise notes entry outlines how matching fields are enumerated, which comparison operators are used, and how precedence is applied when multiple candidate links exist. The entry emphasises that applied-link records include the inputs consulted, the exact rule version in use, and a label describing the relation. When inference is involved, the applied-link record explicitly lists which steps were interpretive and which inputs were directly observed. This form of documentation enables a reader to reapply recorded rules to original inputs and observe whether the link set is reproducible. The note includes an example: a timestamp-window rule combined with actor-role equivalence and context-tag overlap, where the rule version and the applied parameter values are recorded alongside the produced link label for later review.
Sequence reconstruction snapshot: uncertainty and tie-break approaches
Reconstruction entries document how discrete events are ordered and how uncertainty is represented. A snapshot explains the treatment of concurrent entries and ambiguous timestamps. When ordering cannot be determined, the reconstruction records the indeterminate relation and preserves the original timestamps and anchor evidence. Where tie-break rules are applied, the reconstruction notes the tie-break rule version and records the minimal justification for the chosen ordering. All reconstruction steps include references to the primary inputs used and annotate which parts of the order are observed and which are inferred. The objective is to keep reconstructions auditable: a reader can follow the referenced inputs, the applied tie-break rule, and the recorded rationale to understand why a particular order was chosen and how to reverse or revise that order if alternative evidence emerges.