Evidence should not be attached to a metadata-only trade asset as an undifferentiated folder of files. Each source should explain which claim it supports, who produced it, when it was produced, and how it affects review-only state.
Link evidence to claims
An invoice may support price and quantity, while a transport record may support shipment. The system should connect each source to specific claims instead of treating every document as proof of the entire case.
Preserve provenance
For every source, record:
- producing party or system;
- source date and upload date;
- original file or reference;
- extraction method;
- human confirmation status;
- later amendments or superseding records.
Keep conflicting claims separate
A metadata-only trade asset may have invoice quantity, shipment quantity, and warehouse quantity that disagree. The review-only model should preserve all three with provenance and create a question rather than silently overwriting values.
Represent authority
The record should distinguish the person who uploaded evidence, the participant who confirmed a fact, and the authorized reviewer who may accept or reject it. Evidence presence is non-approval and non-execution.
Track time and freshness
Some evidence becomes stale. Identity records, insurance coverage, inspection results, and confirmations may need validity periods or review dates.
Use typed relationships
Useful link types include supports, contradicts, amends, supersedes, confirms, disputes, and is-required-for. Typed links make the evidence graph more useful than a flat attachment list.
The result is a metadata-only trade asset record that can explain why a claim exists, what supports it, and what remains unresolved without triggering payment, settlement, token movement, chain submission, or capital execution.