One file can hold many paths outward
We have extracted 590 relationship records from bill 2021/22:225. They point to legal provisions, other documents, actors and concepts, among other things. Each record has evidence in the source that can be examined. This gives the document a context the next person can follow.
562 records are candidates that have not yet been independently reviewed. A reference in one source and a new claim about several sources call for different kinds of review.
See the complete bill and its evidence ↗Two guidelines. One question between them.
In this fictional case, two municipalities set different school transport distances for years 4 to 6: three and four kilometres. Both refer to the same law. Each guideline’s relationship to the legal source can be described. Comparing the guidelines then raises a question worth investigating.
FICTIONAL TEACHING EXAMPLE
Two guidelines cite the same law but specify different distances. See how the difference can become a question with its own source references.
School transport guideline
Three kilometres for pupils in years 4–6.
School transport guideline
Four kilometres for pupils in years 4–6.
AN INTERTWEEN · ITS OWN KNOWLEDGE OBJECT
What could explain the difference?
- Identity
- EX-ITW-02
- Sources
- EX-RIKT-A + EX-RIKT-B + EX-LAG-01
- Status
- Proposed question · not yet reviewed
- Responsibility for further investigation
- Nobody has taken this on in the example.
All sources and references are fictional. The steps are prepared; no search or AI runs and no data is transferred between organisations.
A case officer can add local circumstances, another legal provision or a challenge. Understanding can grow around the question without rewriting either municipality’s original guideline.
Explore the example and switch perspectives ↗The question gets a place of its own
An intertween is a Knowledge Object for a question, pattern or insight emerging between independently governed sources. It has an identifier, a record of how it was recognised, references to its sources, evidence, status and conditions of visibility. A relationship record can say that a guideline refers to a law. Here we also need to examine the claim about the difference between guidelines.
Detected
Someone notices the difference and identifies the compared sources.
Proposed
The question is recorded with its own evidence, method and uncertainty.
Reviewed
Those involved can add context, challenge the claim and take responsibility for further review.
The question may be visible before anyone takes responsibility for resolving it. The local node must then preserve evidence and review status without inventing an owner. Stewarding visibility and evidence is distinct from owning either municipality’s decision.
Each source keeps its conditions
Being in the register does not make something true, give you the right to use it or put you in charge of it.
Even a relationship or the existence of the question can reveal something sensitive. The local node therefore determines which description and evidence a person or agent may see, according to purpose, authority and source conditions. Permitted discovery does not itself grant access to the municipalities’ source material.
Whoever creates or changes a proposal must be identifiable in its history. Challenges and later reviews attach to the intertween as separate contributions. The source content and mandates remain with their custodians.
From insight to skill
An intertween can seed a skill: a reusable method for an activity under specified conditions. The skill is represented as its own Knowledge Object with instructions, sources, evidence, limitations and conditions.
The original question remains. Several skills can develop from one insight, and one skill can draw on several intertweens. Having the description does not demonstrate the ability to perform the method.