Operational Semantics 3 capabilities
Lesson 4 of 4 domains — 3 capabilities: how the infrastructure is managed and kept running.
This domain answers: How is the infrastructure managed and kept running — ownership, connectivity, resilience?
Source for this lesson
semantic-capabilities-reference.md, section "Operational Semantics (3 capabilities)"
1. The question this domain answers
The first three domains are all about a piece of data — what it's about, how it was obtained, how much to trust it. This one is different: it's about the asset's ongoing lifecycle and its ability to keep functioning when things go wrong. Some sub-observations here aren't even a measurement — they're administrative facts, like who owns the thing.
2. The three capabilities
| Capability | Question it answers | Reference doc's examples |
|---|---|---|
| Asset Management Context | Who owns and maintains this, and where is it in its lifecycle? | Ownership; responsible organization; operational zone; maintenance responsibility; contracts; warranty; lifecycle stage; installation date; remaining useful life |
| Network Operability | Is the asset reachable right now, and how good is that connection? | Network availability; connectivity status; latency; packet loss; signal quality; communication reliability; communication technology |
| Fallback Behaviour | What does the asset do autonomously when supervisory control is lost? | Local schedules; autonomous control; safe operating mode; emergency operating mode; manual override; local decision making |
3. How these three relate
Network Operability and Fallback Behaviour are closely linked but answer different questions: Network Operability describes the connection state itself (is it up, how good is it); Fallback Behaviour describes what the asset actually does as a consequence of that state. A degraded connection is Network Operability; the asset switching to a local emergency schedule because of that degraded connection is Fallback Behaviour, with Network Operability as a natural companion explaining why.
Asset Management Context is the odd one out — it's rarely about live telemetry at all. Recognize it by asking: is this sub-observation about a measurement, or about paperwork (ownership, contracts, warranty, lifecycle)? If it's paperwork, it's Asset Management Context, full stop — there's no live-data tie-breaker to weigh here.
4. Fresh example — a valve losing contact
| Sub-observation | Primary Capability | Companion Capability | Why |
|---|---|---|---|
| Owned by Parks Dept, 5-year maintenance contract | Asset Management Context | — | Pure administrative fact — ownership and contract terms, not a measurement. |
| Signal quality degraded, then connection lost | Network Operability | — | Describes the connectivity state itself, over the last 10 minutes. |
| Now running local emergency schedule | Fallback Behaviour | Network Operability | This is what the valve is doing as a result — the connectivity loss is why, so it rides along as context. |