Framework

The Framework is the shared meaning of the World Skills Protocol: a versioned reference, published by Opus X, that defines skills and their levels. Evidence references a Framework coordinate (e.g. wtr:212); it never carries the level definitions itself. This is why the same attested level means the same thing across every Issuer, and why trust can be recomputed when a Framework evolves.

Canonical Definition

A Framework is a versioned, published reference — owned by Opus X — that defines a namespace of skills and the level semantics for each, addressable by stable coordinates, which Evidence references to express what was demonstrated, and against whose applicable version trust is computed.

Key Facts

  • —A Framework is designed to define skills and levels canonically, to be versioned so meaning can evolve without rewriting history, to be addressable by stable coordinates, and to be referenced (never embedded) by Evidence.
  • —The central tension is between stability and evolution: references must be stable, yet meaning must be improvable.
  • —WSP resolves this through versioning — coordinates remain addressable while versions carry evolving level semantics, and trust is recomputed against the applicable version.
  • —A second tension is between Issuer autonomy and shared meaning: Issuers attest freely but MUST reference shared level definitions rather than inventing their own.

Why It Exists

For trust to be comparable across many Issuers, "level 3 in risk management" must mean the same thing regardless of who attested it. If each Issuer defined its own levels, attestations would be incommensurable and any aggregate trust would be meaningless. The Framework exists to hold level definitions in one published, versioned place so that every Issuer references the same meaning. It also exists to make reinterpretation safe: when standards evolve, a new Framework version changes meaning going forward and enables recomputation of trust from unchanged Evidence — something impossible if levels lived inside each fact.

How It Works

A Framework comprises a Framework ID, a set of Skills and Competencies, the level semantics for each, a coordinate scheme for addressing them, and a version. A coordinate such as wtr:212 resolves through the Framework Registry to a specific skill/competency and its levels within a version.

A Framework does not comprise Evidence, professionals, trust values, or Issuer-local rubrics. The relations are directional: a Framework defines Skills and Levels; Evidence references a Framework coordinate; the Framework Registry resolves coordinates; Trust is computed against a Framework version. No relation lets an Issuer author or edit level definitions.

Actors

A Framework defines Skills (OCR-116), Competencies (OCR-117), and Capabilities (OCR-118). It is resolved_by the Framework Registry (OCR-119). It is referenced_by Evidence (OCR-110). It is used_by Trust (OCR-105) as the semantics against which facts are computed. It is published_by and governed_by Opus X. It is part_of the World Skills Protocol (OCR-100).

Lifecycle

  1. 01Authoring — Opus X drafts a Framework version defining skills and levels.
  2. 02Publication — the version is published and its coordinates become addressable.
  3. 03Reference — Issuers reference coordinates in Evidence.
  4. 04Resolution — the Framework Registry resolves coordinates to skills and levels.
  5. 05Computation — trust is computed against the applicable version.
  6. 06Versioning — a new version is published; prior Evidence is unchanged; trust may be recomputed against the new semantics per policy.

Examples

  • ·The wtr Framework defines a competency addressed by wtr:212 and the levels for its criteria; an Issuer references wtr:212 in Evidence without restating the level definitions.
  • ·Opus X publishes wtr version 1.1 refining a level's semantics; past Evidence is unchanged, and trust is recomputed against the new version per policy.
  • ·A coordinate is deprecated for new references but remains addressable because existing Evidence points to it.

Counter Examples

  • ×An Issuer's private rubric defining its own levels — not a Framework; levels must be Opus X-published.
  • ×Level definitions copied inside an Evidence payload — Evidence references, it never embeds.
  • ×A course syllabus — a Framework defines skills and levels, not lessons.
  • ×Editing a published version's level meaning in place — meaning evolves by new version only.

Distinctions

A Framework is often confused with a course or curriculum; it defines meaning, not instruction. It is assumed each Issuer has its own; there is one published Framework meaning that all reference. It is assumed levels live in Evidence; levels live in the Framework. It is assumed a Framework can be edited to change past meaning; it is versioned, and past Evidence is preserved.

FAQ

What is a Framework?
A versioned, published reference defining skills and their levels.
Who owns it?
Opus X.
Where are levels defined?
In the Framework — never in Evidence, never by an Issuer.
How is a Framework addressed?
By a Framework ID (e.g. wtr) and coordinates (e.g. wtr:212).
What is wtr?
The World Trader Framework identifier used in the project.
Does Evidence contain level definitions?
No; it references a coordinate.
Can an Issuer define levels?
No.
How does meaning evolve?
By publishing a new version.
Can a published version be edited in place?
No.
What happens to past Evidence when a version changes?
It is unchanged; trust may be recomputed.
What resolves a coordinate?
The Framework Registry (OCR-119).
Can a referenced coordinate be erased?
No; it may be deprecated.
Is a Framework a course?
No.
Does a Framework contain personal data?
No.
Can an AI invent a level?
No; it must resolve against the Framework version.
What is a criterion?
An assessable element (e.g. S03.C08) mapped to a coordinate.
How many Frameworks can exist?
Many; each has a stable ID.
Who publishes versions?
Opus X, authenticated.
What computes against a Framework?
Trust (OCR-105).
Why not let levels live in Evidence?
Because attestations would become incommensurable across Issuers.

Related Entities

Normative Sources

OCR-100 World Skills Protocol · OCR-105 Trust · OCR-110 Evidence · OCR-116 Skill · OCR-117 Competency · OCR-118 Capability · OCR-119 Framework Registry.

View the Framework Registry Entry