Change record
Free foreverEvery change to the specification and the vocabulary is recorded here, along with every proposal we have received. Declined proposals are published too. A register that only shows agreement is not a register.
- Specification
- v0.1.5 draft
- Vocabulary
- v1.1
- Open for comment
- None currently
01 · Open for comment
What is open now
Nothing open at the moment.
The first comment period will open when the assurance record moves from draft to proposal, expected in 2027. Comment periods run for 60 days and are announced here and by email to anyone who asks to be told.
02 · Versions
What has changed
Superseded versions remain published permanently at stable URLs. Nothing is removed.
Restructured the site for clarity. Marked launch-dated functions, added a waitlist, and moved supporting evidence to What We Do.
- Restructured the site for clarity
- Marked launch-dated functions and added a waitlist
- Moved supporting evidence to What We Do
Scoped hybridization capture as the next supported method. Added bait panel identity and version as a planned assurance-record field. Corrected citations, replicate terminology and scope statements across the site.
- Scoped hybridization capture as the next supported method
- Added bait panel identity and version as a planned assurance-record field
- Corrected citations, replicate terminology and scope statements across the site
Every field in the assurance record is now mandatory. Sixteen fields that were optional or conditional accept the literal value `not recorded`, so a gap is declared rather than silent. Nine fields admit no substitute. The validator gains a completeness score and a declared-gap tier.
- Sixteen fields moved from optional or conditional to required, each permitting the declared unknown `not recorded`
- `minutesToPreservation` remains required and now permits `not recorded`, which closes the question of how to mandate a field many submitters cannot supply
- Nine fields deliberately excluded from the pattern: the two coordinates, collection date and time, assay type, marker, pipeline version, reference database version, record hash and specification version
- Requirement levels reduced from three to two; SHOULD is no longer used
- Conditional rules retained but reframed — they now identify where a declared gap is costly rather than whether a field must appear
- Conformance criteria updated: a declared gap is conformant, and completeness is not conformance
- Validator reports a completeness score and lists each declared gap with the consequence of that absence
- Published JSON Schema regenerated: unknown-permitting fields expressed as `anyOf` with a `not recorded` constant
- Two open questions published rather than settled: whether the pattern should be universal, and whether `not recorded` should split into never captured, not applicable and withheld
Scope clarified at launch. Coverage stated as DNA metabarcoding with targeted assays, hybridization capture and environmental RNA on the roadmap. Field supply responsibility made explicit. Data residency position and commitment stated separately.
- Launch coverage scoped to DNA metabarcoding; other methods marked roadmap
- Workflow entry point stated as FASTQ submission
- Every assurance record field now declares whether it is supplied by the submitter or generated by Common Measure
- Data storage position and processing commitment stated separately and with dates
- Explicit commitment added that Common Measure does not route, rank or market laboratories
- Open question added on whether replicate allocation should be captured explicitly, driven by 2026 studies showing equivalent richness from different replicate structures
- No field definitions or requirement levels were altered
Renamed from "The Standard" to "The Specification" across the site, with redirects from all previous URLs. No change to the content of the specification itself.
- Routes moved from /standard to /specification, with permanent redirects
- Navigation and footer labels updated
- Schema file identifiers updated to the new URLs
- No field definitions, requirement levels or scope were altered
Third publication in the Common Measure Insights series.
- Published: We have not written a standard
- Aligned site-wide language so Common Measure's work is consistently described as a specification
Second publication in the Common Measure Insights series.
- Published: A detection is not an occurrence
- Added further-reading links between Insights articles, the specification and the vocabulary
First publication in the Common Measure Insights series.
- Published: Reliability was never the problem
- Added an authored TL;DR to the article template and Insights RSS feed
Fourteen terms added and four revised, extending the vocabulary across terrestrial, marine, sediment and airborne substrates and documenting published standards. Fifty-nine terms in total.
- Added: Airborne eDNA, Benthic, Biosecurity, Bulk sample, Leaf swab, Pelagic, Pollen metabarcoding, Rhizosphere, Sediment core, Soil core, Substrate, Trophic marker
- Added: ISO 17805 and ISO/IEC 17025
- Revised: Bioassessment, eDNA, Metabarcoding, Sampling variance, so their examples are not exclusively aquatic
- No definitions withdrawn; previous version remains published
First publication of the controlled vocabulary. Forty-five terms covering sampling, laboratory method, analysis, statistics and standards.
- Initial publication of 45 terms
- Definitions drafted by Common Measure, pending review by the science committee on formation
- All terms open to challenge
First publication of scope, boundaries, versioning policy, license and citation form. The specification itself remains in development.
- Scope defined across five components: identifier, reference frame, assurance record, conformance, vocabulary
- Out-of-scope boundaries published
- Versioning policy adopted
- Published under CC BY 4.0
- Assurance record published as a draft field list
03 · Proposals
What has been proposed
Every proposal is logged with its outcome. Where a proposal was declined, the reason is stated. Names are published with permission and withheld on request.
No proposals yet.
This register begins the first time someone tells us a definition is wrong. We expect that to happen quickly.
04 · Method
What gets recorded, and what does not
Everything substantive is logged.
Any proposal affecting a definition, a required field, or the scope of the specification gets a reference number and an outcome.
Corrections are logged as patches.
Typographical fixes and wording clarifications that do not alter meaning appear as patch versions, listed but not put out for comment.
Private commercial discussions are not published.
Customer conversations, contract terms and pricing negotiations are not proposals and do not appear here.
Decisions currently rest with Common Measure.
On formation of the science committee they pass to it, and we hold no vote. That transition will itself be recorded here.
Nothing here yet is a good sign of how early we are
This register exists before there is much to put in it, because building it afterwards would mean deciding retrospectively what deserved recording. It is easier to be honest when the page is empty.
Propose a change