Intertween reference library Documentation, sources and later decisions →
KNOWLEDGE OBJECTS
Knowledge that carries its context and conditions.
INTERTWEEN / protocol PROTOCOL
A Knowledge Object is a governed representation of something known, observed, claimed or produced. It carries provenance, rights, legal basis, classification, jurisdiction, confidence and responsibility without confusing the representation with the thing it concerns.
Not a smarter file.
A portable knowledge contract.
Files carry content. Knowledge Objects also carry the evidence required to interpret that content: what it concerns, where it came from, who is responsible, what changed, how it may be used and what remains uncertain.
!rule / Ingestion creates an observation, not truth.
The thing is not the knowledge about the thing.
An entity may be a person, object, place, concept, process, relationship, event or phenomenon. It can remain persistently referable while multiple organisations contribute different representations and claims about it.
[ENTITY REFERENCE]Doorway A
intw:entity:local:door-aOne entity can have many Knowledge Objects. One Knowledge Object can concern several entities or the relationship among them.
Anything can act. Nothing is always an actor.
ENTITY
A person, policy, document, organisation, algorithm, material object, concept or other identifiable thing.
CONTEXT
The event, process, decision, relation or situation in which participation is observed.
PARTICIPATION
The governed record connecting an entity to a context through a named role and evidenced effect.
ACTANT ROLE
A contextual interpretation that the entity made a difference here. It is not a permanent entity type.
AGENT
An operational participant authorised to initiate or perform a bounded action.
RESPONSIBLE PARTY
A person, organisation or function that can carry formal accountability. Not every actant can do so.
!rule / Actorship is expressed through context, role, effect and evidence. Identifying an entity never grants it agency, authority or responsibility.
A policy becomes an actant through its effects.
[policy entity]→{participates in decision}→[role: constraint]→{effect: access limited}
The policy is an entity. Its text and interpretations are Knowledge Objects. In a particular decision, a Participation record can show that the policy constrained access. The policy is therefore treated as an actant in that context, without being confused with a human decision-maker or a legally responsible organisation.
Read the normative participation model →Persistent subjects. Situated action. Governed views.
Entity reference
A persistent reference to anything that knowledge can concern.
Knowledge Object
A governed representation carrying context, provenance and rights.
Assertion
A sourced and contestable claim about an entity, value or relationship.
Event
A time-bound occurrence recording change, use or consequence.
Participation
A situated record of how an entity takes part, in which role and with what observed effect.
Actant role
A contextual analytical role indicating that an entity made a difference in a particular relation or event.
Projection
A context-specific view assembled from permitted knowledge.
Agent
A person, organisation or system authorised to perform a bounded operation.
Two municipalities interpret the same guidance differently.
The assessments are Knowledge Objects. Their consequential divergence can become an intertween: a matter visible only through their relationships. Not every Knowledge Object is an intertween.
Intertween does not determine the correct interpretation or replace the assessment required in an individual case. Each responsible authority retains its mandate and accountability.
An intertween is relational knowledge formed among independently addressable objects, entities, events, participations and contexts. It may represent a cross-boundary matter before any responsible party owns it. A noetic encounter may be the moment a person or agent first perceives the pattern; a custodian keeps the observation visible while ownership remains an explicit, provenance-tracked lifecycle.
Objects→Noetic encounter→Governed emergence→Intertween
Intertweening
Detect, propose, evidence, validate, contest and maintain what may be knowable across independently governed sources.
An intertween
A Knowledge Object whose emergence cannot be attributed to any single constituent source and whose recognition remains inspectable.
Relational intelligence
The durable ability to inspect, govern and reuse what becomes knowable across sources and over time.
EXAMPLE / DISTRIBUTED PUBLIC-SECTOR LEARNING
Three municipalities apply the same requirement differently.
No single decision contains that observation. The protocol can materialise the divergence as a proposed intertween, link every contributing object, record the comparison method and confidence, then route the claim for validation or contestation.
intw:intertween:interpretation-divergence-x01Unclaimed02Surfaced03Between04Contested05Emerging06Claimed
!rule / A noetic encounter is not validation. When relational insight becomes addressable, the protocol registers a new intertween with its own identity, provenance, rights and validation state without changing its source objects.
Every intertween must remain reflexive.
Who recognised me? From which observation and registration contexts? Which entities participated, in which roles and with what effects? What supports or contradicts me? Who may discover me or inspect my evidence? What happened after I appeared?
Recognition can travel without exposing its origins.
Local emergence
One node registers a relational pattern within its own governed context.
Parallel emergence
Another node independently registers a similar pattern with separate identity and provenance.
Federated recognition
Permitted references or projections are related without exposing the underlying local material.
Federated emergence
The supported correspondence becomes a new intertween with its own registration, evidence and authority scope.
Local emergence remains local until deliberately exposed. Federation does not imply visibility, equivalence or shared truth.
Objects are gathered. Knowledgers are characterised. Intertweens emerge.
#KnowledgeObject→[membership_assertion]→#Knowledger→{CurrentKnowledgeState}
A Knowledger is itself a specialised Knowledge Object: an addressable, governed and versioned composition. Its members keep their own identity, authority, provenance and rights. Observers may characterise it as resemblance, evidence, contradiction, risk or shared learning through separate, attributable Characterization Assertions. These claims do not mutate its immutable manifest.
Read the composition profile →#CORE / [ANATOMY]
Ten domains travel together.
[identity]
A stable identifier and all local identifiers that follow the object.
[source & content]
Canonical reference, observed payload, retrieval time, fingerprint and carried information.
[provenance]
How the object was observed, mapped, changed, attributed and validated.
[rights]
Permissions, prohibitions, duties, licence and AI-use conditions.
[legal basis]
Purpose and legal basis for processing, explicitly separate from usage rights.
[jurisdiction]
Where the object may reside and be processed, including disclosure assessment.
[classification]
Information class, secrecy marker, security level and personal-data status.
[custody & responsibility]
Who holds the observation visible and, separately, who owns the matter.
[confidence & evidence]
Assessment level, method, supporting evidence and contradictions.
[state & relationships]
Lifecycle plus typed, evidenced participation among entities, contexts, cases and other objects.
A public decision becomes usable without becoming ownerless.
[entity]→{observations + assertions}→#KnowledgeObjects→{permitted projection}
The source remains authoritative for what it issued. Assertions from different authorities can coexist, be disputed or superseded, and appear differently in public, local, audit, AI and federated projections.
Review the standards alignment and its limits →Persistent reference without central capture.
The protocol is not a universal entity registry, master-data platform, social network, central knowledge graph or single ontology.
Nodes retain their own identifiers and authority. Mappings can express equivalence, uncertainty and difference without destructive merging or a central operator claiming the canonical truth.