HypothesisVery high confidenceCurrent
The customer-owned action episode, rather than the workflow definition, should be Dataheart's primary portability invariant.
Define a versioned episode schema before selecting engines.
Valid from2026-08-23
Last reviewed2026-08-23
Review again2026-11-21
Dataheart stanceexploring
Evidence for
Workflow engines differ in execution history, approval models and extensions.
IEEE — IEEE 1849-2023 XES · standards.ieee.org ↗OCEL — Object-Centric Event Log 2.0 specification · ocel-standard.org ↗XES and OCEL demonstrate the value of portable event representations.
IEEE — IEEE 1849-2023 XES · standards.ieee.org ↗OCEL — Object-Centric Event Log 2.0 specification · ocel-standard.org ↗Customer ownership permits independent audit and migration.
IEEE — IEEE 1849-2023 XES · standards.ieee.org ↗OCEL — Object-Centric Event Log 2.0 specification · ocel-standard.org ↗Evidence against
A canonical episode model introduces mapping and dual-write cost.
IEEE — IEEE 1849-2023 XES · standards.ieee.org ↗OCEL — Object-Centric Event Log 2.0 specification · ocel-standard.org ↗Some runtime-specific states cannot be represented without extensions.
IEEE — IEEE 1849-2023 XES · standards.ieee.org ↗OCEL — Object-Centric Event Log 2.0 specification · ocel-standard.org ↗How this claim can fall
Replace this placeholder during human review with an observable result that would materially weaken or falsify the claim.
A published claim remains useful only while it remains possible to prove it wrong.