Modeling Guide
Knowledge Guides /How Should Cross-Tool Requirements Exchange Be Accepted? Track Data Loss Explicitly
Last updated: · New Horizon Digital Outsourcing Team
Agree separately on preservation of objects, attributes, relationships, and attachments. Whether using ReqIF or spreadsheets, check representative data and document unsupported content. A shared file format does not establish equivalent tool implementations.
Define the Exchange Package
- State whether the task is a migration, recurring exchange, or archive, identifying sender, recipient, and authoritative source. Define scope for text, custom attributes, hierarchy, relationships, and attachments; agree separately on review history and permissions.
- Record the export account's visibility and filters, checking whether permissions or filtering affect the manifest. Distinguish intentional exclusions from accidental omissions rather than assuming a restricted view represents the full project.
Agree on Identity and Relationship Mapping
- Keep a traceable mapping of identifiers across tools and define how creation differs from updating. Names alone are insufficient: identically named objects may occupy different levels, and the same object may be renamed after exchange.
- Check relationship type, direction, and both endpoints separately. Where the target lacks equivalent semantics, record the unsupported item and its original meaning rather than converting everything to untyped links and claiming equivalence.
Expose Losses with a Round-Trip Sample
- Prepare a representative sample containing enums, custom attributes, long text, cross-table relationships, and attachments. Export, import at the receiving tool, then re-export and inspect the returned data in an isolated environment, retaining versions and exchange settings.
- Classify content as preserved, transformed, lost, or undetermined and explain consequences for later use. Round-trip agreement applies to the tested sample and settings, not every object, plugin, or software version.
Have the Recipient Confirm Usability
- The recipient should independently locate a selected record, inspect attributes, follow relationships, and open agreed attachments. Record display problems, missing dependencies, and ambiguous semantics in the loss register so both parties can revise mappings, reduce scope, or add deliverables.
- Deliver exchange files, identifier mappings, the loss register, and reconciliation records, naming the owner of subsequent changes. This is technical acceptance guidance, not a claim that any format automatically carries complete models, history, or collaboration permissions.