Domain I · Area I-CA1 · Reporting technology, automation and structured data

I.3Apply taxonomies, structured data and digital tagging

Working Draft version 1.1

Purpose and scope

This unit covers the capability to understand and apply structured-data concepts, reporting taxonomies and digital tagging to approved sustainability information. It includes taxonomy scope and version, concepts, labels, references, data types, period and entity context, dimensions, units, calculations, anchors, entity-specific extensions, presentation, validation, filing packages and reconciliation to human-readable reporting.

Applied competency statement

Can map approved sustainability disclosures to applicable taxonomy concepts, apply and review digital tags and extensions and validate structured information for completeness, consistency and reconciliation to the human-readable report.

Boundary and escalation

This unit owns taxonomy mapping, tagging, entity-specific extensions, semantic and technical validation and reconciliation to the human-readable report. D.2 owns architecture, E.1 owns definitions and controlled data terminology and G.10 owns final presentation. Legal filing, authoritative taxonomy interpretation and issuer approval remain with qualified owners.

Key quality risks

Applying the wrong taxonomy or version; selecting a concept because the label appears similar; tagging an incomplete disclosure; incorrect entity, period, unit, balance or data type; dimensions applied inconsistently; narrative facts duplicated or omitted; unnecessary or poorly anchored extensions; calculation relationships assumed to prove accounting or reporting correctness; tagged and human-readable values diverging; validation errors ignored; and technical filing success described as compliance.

Required knowledge · 6

I.3-K01

Understands machine-readable reporting, taxonomy, concept, element, label, reference, data type, context, entity, period, unit, dimension, member, fact and filing package.

Knowledge Type: Structured-data concepts · Normative Weight: Core

I.3-K02

Understands taxonomy scope, release and effective version, jurisdictional or market filing rules, taxonomy updates and controlled version selection.

Knowledge Type: Taxonomy applicability and versioning · Normative Weight: Core

I.3-K03

Understands concept selection, standard and dimensional tagging, narrative or text-block tagging, precision, decimals, units, period type and consistency with the underlying disclosure.

Knowledge Type: Tagging judgement · Normative Weight: Core

I.3-K04

Understands when an entity-specific extension may be needed, naming and definition discipline, wider and narrower relationships, anchoring, duplication and comparability risk.

Knowledge Type: Extensions and anchoring · Normative Weight: Core

I.3-K05

Understands technical validation, duplicate and nil facts, calculation and presentation relationships, consistency checks and reconciliation to authoritative narrative and metrics.

Knowledge Type: Validation and reconciliation · Normative Weight: Core

I.3-K06

Understands the distinction among taxonomy mapping, technical filing validation, disclosure compliance, accounting or reporting judgement and legal filing approval.

Knowledge Type: Professional boundary · Normative Weight: Core

Applied skills · 5

I.3-S01

Determine the applicable taxonomy and version and map approved disclosures, metrics and contexts to candidate concepts.

Skill Type: Core applied capability · Observable Output or Result: Taxonomy applicability and disclosure-to-concept map

I.3-S02

Select concepts, contexts, units, dimensions and precision and prepare justified entity-specific extensions and anchors where needed.

Skill Type: Tagging and extension design · Observable Output or Result: Structured-data tagging and extension workpaper

I.3-S03

Review semantic fit, completeness, duplicate facts, dimensions, period, units, precision, extension quality and consistency with the report.

Skill Type: Tagging review · Observable Output or Result: Digital-tagging quality review

I.3-S04

Run or interpret validation results, investigate errors and warnings and reconcile tagged facts and narrative to authoritative reporting information.

Skill Type: Validation and reconciliation · Observable Output or Result: Digital-tagging validation and filing-readiness record

I.3-S05

Control taxonomy updates, tag changes, filing-package versions, approvals, archive and communication with digital, finance, legal and filing owners.

Skill Type: Change and filing support · Observable Output or Result: Taxonomy version and filing-change record

Professional behaviours · 3

I.3-B01

Does not select a taxonomy concept solely because its label resembles the disclosure where the definition, reference or context does not fit.

Behaviour Type: Semantic discipline · Non-compensable Requirement: No

I.3-B02

Does not create entity-specific extensions to avoid an applicable standard concept or to create a more favourable or distinctive presentation.

Behaviour Type: Extension restraint · Non-compensable Requirement: No

I.3-B03

Does not describe successful technical validation or tagging completion as proof that the underlying disclosure or filing is compliant.

Behaviour Type: Compliance humility · Non-compensable Requirement: No

Typical tasks · 4

I.3-T01

Confirm the applicable taxonomy, version, filing context, report architecture, authoritative disclosures and digital owners.

Primary Output Link: I.3-O01

I.3-T02

Map and tag facts and narrative and define contexts, units, dimensions, precision, extensions and anchors.

Primary Output Link: I.3-O02

I.3-T03

Review semantic fit and completeness, run validation and reconcile structured data to the final human-readable report.

Primary Output Link: I.3-O03

I.3-T04

Resolve findings, obtain digital, finance, legal and governance approval and control versions, filing packages and later changes.

Primary Output Link: I.3-O03

Expected outputs · 3

I.3-O01

Taxonomy applicability and disclosure-to-concept map

Output Type: Professional work product

I.3-O02

Structured-data tagging and extension workpaper

Output Type: Professional work product

I.3-O03

Digital-tagging validation and filing-readiness record

Output Type: Professional work product

Proficiency indicators

Level 1 · Foundation

I.3-L1-01

Can apply an approved tag map, maintain contexts and units and identify obvious missing, duplicate or inconsistent facts and validation errors.

Indicator Dimension: Task execution

I.3-L1-02

Can recognise uncertain concept or extension decisions and escalate them to qualified digital-reporting or filing owners.

Indicator Dimension: Quality, judgement and accountability

Level 2 · Practitioner

I.3-L2-01

Can independently map and review structured reporting for a moderately complex set of sustainability disclosures, including dimensions and limited extensions.

Indicator Dimension: Task execution

I.3-L2-02

Can resolve routine semantic and validation issues and explain extension, reconciliation and version decisions to management and reviewers.

Indicator Dimension: Quality, judgement and accountability

Level 3 · Advanced Practitioner

I.3-L3-01

Can design or critically review enterprise taxonomy, tagging, extension and filing-readiness governance across complex reports, taxonomies and jurisdictions.

Indicator Dimension: Method design and review

I.3-L3-02

Can challenge poor semantic mapping or excessive extensions, resolve significant reconciliation and version issues and advise governance bodies on digital comparability and filing risk.

Indicator Dimension: Leadership and governance

Illustrative evidence · 6

I.3-E01

Taxonomy applicability and disclosure-to-concept map.

Evidence Type: Work product

I.3-E02

Structured-data tagging and extension workpaper.

Evidence Type: Work product

I.3-E03

Digital-tagging validation and filing-readiness record.

Evidence Type: Work product

I.3-E04

Taxonomy, tag, context, extension, validation, reconciliation, approval and filing-version trail.

Evidence Type: Process evidence

I.3-E05

Documented digital-reporting, finance, legal, filing, quality or management review and the practitioner's response.

Evidence Type: Review evidence

I.3-E06

Observed tagging review or defence of a concept, dimension or extension decision.

Evidence Type: Observed performance

Assessment · 3

I.3-A-L1

Tagging-map exercise, validation review and situational judgement

Tagging accuracy; context and unit understanding; validation and escalation awareness.

I.3-A-L2

Integrated structured-reporting case and professional memorandum

Semantic mapping; extension and anchoring; reconciliation and validation; version and communication.

I.3-A-L3

Complex taxonomy-governance case, portfolio and oral defence

Method design; extension restraint; semantic and disclosure reconciliation; governance advice and oral defence.

Relationships · 6

From	To	Type	Rationale
D.2	I.3	Feeds into	The approved disclosure architecture, content locations and authoritative disclosures feed the taxonomy applicability, concept-mapping and digital-tagging process.
I.3	D.2	Operational and workflow linkage	Disclosure architecture and content locations provide the basis for taxonomy mapping and structured presentation.
I.3	E.1	Method, data and analytical linkage	Metric definitions, data dictionaries and controlled terminology support consistent taxonomy mapping.
I.3	G.8	Disclosure, claims and publication linkage	Structured facts should reconcile to authoritative narrative, metrics and external reporting channels.
I.3	G.10	Disclosure, claims and publication linkage	Digital tags and filing information should remain consistent with comparative and accessible human-readable reporting.
I.3	I.1	Digital and technology linkage	Tagging tools and filing platforms should be selected and controlled against digital-reporting requirements.

Role profiles for this unit

Role	Target level	Relevance	Evidence expectation
Corporate Sustainability Reporting Practitioner	Foundation	Supporting?	A supervised or defined work sample showing correct application, traceability and recognition of escalation needs.
Sustainability Reporting Manager or Lead	Practitioner	Required?	A case or work sample demonstrating independent performance, documented judgement and a reviewable professional output.
Sustainability Reporting Adviser or Consultant	Practitioner	Required?	A case or work sample demonstrating independent performance, documented judgement and a reviewable professional output.
Sustainability Data, Systems and Controls Specialist	Advanced Practitioner	Role-defining?	A complex case or verified portfolio, supplemented by oral or observed defence, demonstrating method design, challenge and governance capability.
Assurance Readiness and Reporting Quality Specialist	Advanced Practitioner	Role-defining?	A complex case or verified portfolio, supplemented by oral or observed defence, demonstrating method design, challenge and governance capability.
Investor, Capital Markets and Ratings Disclosure Specialist	Advanced Practitioner	Role-defining?	A complex case or verified portfolio, supplemented by oral or observed defence, demonstrating method design, challenge and governance capability.