Implementations

Claims must be proportional to verifiable evidence. The site must distinguish:

• canonical definitions and approved governance decisions;
• source-backed explanatory statements;
• historical records;
• third-party claims;
• proposals;
• inferences.

Claims about adoption, performance, partnerships, discounts, preferred terms, supplier accounts, technical access, recognition, awards, legal status, certification, or independent validation require evidence and explicit editorial approval. Missing evidence must not be filled by inference.

Acceptable evidence for an implementation or comparative record includes:

• official public documents of the operator;
• terms, agreements, or published business-model descriptions;
• official statements;
• public technical documentation;
• direct operator confirmation; and
• independent reliable sources.

Evidence records must retain source URL or identifier, publisher, publication/access date, relevant extract or factual summary, review date, reviewer, limitations, conflicts, and correction status.

A company or platform may be assigned only one of these controlled governance classifications for a stated date and evidence set:

9.1 Confirmed PRISM Implementation

Use only when available evidence supports the defining PRISM architecture and Human Authority approves publication of the classification. Confirmation is an evidence-based project classification, not legal advice, certification, endorsement, or guarantee.

9.2 Self-Declared PRISM Implementation

Use when an operator publicly identifies its model as PRISM Commerce but independent review has not confirmed all defining features. The operator’s claim, its date, and the unverified elements must be explicit.

9.3 Related / Adjacent Model

Use when evidence shows relevant architectural similarities or relationships but does not support classification as a PRISM implementation. The page must state the relevant similarities and differences without implying inferiority.

9.4 Comparative Example

Use when a documented model is included solely to explain a comparison dimension. Inclusion does not imply PRISM status, endorsement, affiliation, or criticism.

External similarity alone is never sufficient. Automated classification may assist evidence collection but may not publish or approve a classification. No company name, classification, or implementation list may be published without a separate Human Authority approval specific to the proposed record or approved batch.