…also could be known as…
Deasy’s Preventative Control Catalog for Identifying Data Issues
Deasy’s Preventative Control Catalog, a technology-neutral operating model containing a particularly strong set of generalizable patterns beneath its situation-specific details: explicit authorization and scope; exact source identity and evidence; schema and parser drift detection; uniqueness and referential-integrity checks; idempotent writes; before/after manifests; bounded transactions; independent read-back verification; durable recovery evidence; explicit unresolved states; root-cause discipline; and strict separation of facts, assumptions, candidates, and verified states. Deasy’s generalized catalog below retains those control principles while intentionally removing the original system-, source-, property-, and workflow-specific assumptions.
Choice determines what may be done → Perspective determines what may be believed → Purpose determines what the work must accomplish → Moment determines when that knowledge and action are valid → Structure determines how they are represented and preserved → Scope determines the exact universe over which they apply → Value determines whether the resulting data is actually worthy of reliance → Divinity determines whether all seven agree strongly enough that the whole may truthfully be declared correct.
Choice
Life is shaped by the decisions made, each one setting direction and consequence.
Choice comes first because before touching data, the system must establish what actions are permissible. That is why AUTH-01 through AUTH-09 naturally became CHO controls. A perfectly correct data correction performed without authorization is still an invalid action under the catalog.
Perspective
Understanding comes through the lens one adopts, framing what is seen and valued.
Perspective follows because permission does not establish truth. Once an action is permitted, the next question is what evidence can legitimately support it. That is why the source controls belong here. For example, the original rule that routing attributes are not identity proof becomes a Perspective control because it governs the epistemic status of evidence: an address-like attribute can suggest an identity without proving it. Likewise, “every existing URL is untrusted until revalidated” is fundamentally about what the investigator is entitled to believe. The Truth controls fit here for the same reason: fact, hypothesis, candidate, requirement, and guarantee are different kinds of assertions and cannot be silently exchanged.
Purpose
Meaning arises from intent, guiding effort and defining success.
Purpose then asks why the activity is being performed. The Process controls fit because they discipline investigation toward the actual objective. “Separate diagnosis, mutation, and verification,” for example, is not primarily a database-structure rule; it prevents the means of doing the work from obscuring what each operation is supposed to establish. Communication controls also land here because the purpose of reporting is to communicate the achieved state—not activity masquerading as achievement.
Moment
Time matters; awareness of timing governs opportunity and action.
Moment introduces time. The original Rate controls are obvious examples: cadence, retries, latency, throttling, and ETA all depend on when operations occur. Recovery belongs here because recovery is fundamentally about maintaining truth across state transitions: what happened before interruption, what exists now, and where work legitimately resumes. “Resume from durable evidence” therefore becomes a Moment control rather than merely an operational convenience.
Structure
Order and design give form to existence, enabling stability and growth.
Structure governs the form within which the data exists. Mapping and SQL controls mostly converge here. Mapping defines relationships between identities and representations; SQL defines relationships between values, records, keys, transactions, and persisted state. So rules such as exact identity binding, append-only mapping ledgers, bounded transactions, parent-child atomicity, foreign-key integrity, idempotency, and fresh readback all concern whether the system’s structure can preserve the truth being asserted.
Scope
Boundaries define focus, distinguishing what is included and what is set aside.
Scope is intentionally narrower and more fundamental than Structure. It answers what exact set are we talking about? The original Scope controls therefore map almost directly. The important distinction is that Structure might prove every record currently present is internally valid while Scope discovers that 8% of the required population is absent. Structural correctness cannot compensate for an incorrectly defined universe.
Value
Worth is realized in outcomes, in the impact of choices and actions.
Value concerns the data itself. This is where the Parser controls naturally converge. Once authority, evidence, objective, timing, structure, and population have been established, Value asks whether the actual values survived those processes correctly. That includes the distinction between 0, false, empty, unknown, and genuine source absence; exact history capture; ranges; precision; Unicode; dates; percentages; calculations; and fabricated placeholders. The central question becomes: does this stored value faithfully represent what the qualified evidence actually established?
Divinity
Unity emerges when life aligns with higher principles, closing the cycle of meaning.
Finally, Divinity is where I placed Verification because it is the integration point rather than merely another technical operation. The original VER controls ask whether everything claimed by the preceding controls actually reconciles: identity, roster, completeness, provenance, persisted state, unresolved cases, and current structure. Thus: