visibility.cloud

One trace, two records.

The same handoffs, written twice. Below is the custody chain your read points already produce — and the record behind it, with a switch that adds or removes the one thing the standard has no field for.

Toggle it and watch which questions stop having answers.

Mark approved in artworkChicago, IL · Brand owner · packaging Label stock producedNeenah, WI · Converter · press 3 Case marked at pack-outGreen Bay, WI · Co-man plant · line 2 Scanned at the laneNashville, TN · Store 412 · lane 6 still frame · Enterprise CPG · brand owner a worked example — not live data
A simulation of the event model.

A simulation. Authored scenarios of the event model, played on a globe. Not live data; no live product; no customers.

who resolves via id.org.ai · Agent. Human. Thing.

Why the last two rows decide disputes

Rows one to five are why read-point systems were bought, and they deliver. The last two are why a disputed handoff settles on relationship rather than fact: both parties hold rich, internally consistent, mutually contradictory data, and neither holds anything the other is obliged to accept.

The performer is not a field left blank in EPCIS 2.0. There is no field. Adding one is what the standard’s own extension mechanism is for — the projection stays conformant, and the superset finishes the sentence the standard started.

Worked example. Identifiers use the GS1 demonstration prefix 952 with valid check digits; locations, timestamps and parties are synthetic. EPCIS 2.0 defines an event in five dimensions — what, when, where, why, how (§7.2.2) — with party fields at organization grain (§7.3.6.4; CBV 2.0 §8.7.1). Event identity is the standard’s own hash of normalized fields (CBV 2.0 §8.9), recomputable by either side of a dispute.

get on the list for your side of the handoff