Skip to content
🚧 Early alpha — building the foundation. See the roadmap →

Institutional landscape decisions

Created Updated

Not about picking one pain point — it’s about documenting the COMPLETE mental model with all dimensions so the user can make architectural decisions from a place of understanding. Every entity type must be accounted for in the representations.

  1. Entity types — standard bodies, industry groups, regulators, mapping orgs, vendors, your org, auditors
  2. Relationship types — publishes, mandates, maps/crosswalks, implements, adopts, verifies
  3. Artifact types — frameworks, crosswalks, evidence, assessments, reports
  4. Lifecycle phases — create → publish → adopt → map → evidence → audit → evolve
  5. Evolution patterns — how each entity type handles change differently

Each dimension gets its own clean diagram. Entity types diagram, relationship diagram, lifecycle diagram, etc. Easier to understand one at a time. NOT one complex mega-diagram.

concepts/institutional-landscape.mdx — everything on one page with clear sections, BUT heavily cross-linked to other pages (ontology evolution, framework versioning, GRC teams, ontology lifecycle, terminology).

Scope: Cyber/GRC primary, others as analogies

Section titled “Scope: Cyber/GRC primary, others as analogies”

Document the cyber landscape deeply. Reference medical/financial/scientific as “this pattern exists elsewhere too.” Define categories that generalize.

  • Inline HTML/CSS for simpler diagrams (entity type cards, relationship arrows)
  • Astro components for reusable patterns (if we find ourselves repeating)
  • D3.js Astro Islands for the most complex interactive ones (force-directed entity graph)
  • ALL must be mobile-responsive
  • Animations should communicate structure and liveness, not just be decoration
  • Interactivity should be “as interactive as necessary to communicate the mental model”