wardley-maps.sgit.ai / Admin / Comms
Comms — asks, tasks and open questions
The house convention across this network is to publish the build order unresolved, with the open questions and the tensions visible, and to number the things that need a person so they can be referred to. Asks (N) need somebody outside this repository. Tasks (T) do not. Questions (Q) may not have answers.
Asks — these need somebody
| # | Ask | Status |
|---|---|---|
| N1 | The doctrine count disagrees between the brief and the artefact. The brief commissioning this site describes the assessment as 41 records — 15 strong, 11 partial, 6 weak, 9 no-basis. The artefact holds 40, split 17 / 12 / 6 / 5, and pki.sgit.ai's own page says "all forty". The site publishes the artefact's numbers. Somebody should decide whether the brief's figures came from an earlier version or were simply wrong. | Open |
| N2 | The concepts table disagrees with its own header. The header says 33 entries — 14 [O], 13 [E], 6 [S]. Parsing the table yields 35 rows classified 17 / 14 / 4. Four rows are lettered sub-entries, which explains the row count but not the class split. The glossary and the endpoint publish the parse. | Open |
| N3 | sgit.ai's network page lists four sites and no mapping site. It needs a fifth entry pointing here. Similarly, nhi.sgit.ai, sentinel.sgit.ai and riskmandate.ai mention Wardley zero times and each has a map-shaped hole — the specifics. | Needs sibling sites |
| N4 | Ask Simon Wardley which licence the map repository is under. The README says CC BY-SA; the GitHub licence field says GPL-3.0. 147 maps across 22 industries are worth one email, and until it is answered the repository is link-only. | Open |
| N5 | Establish exact dates for seven Open Security Summit sessions. Items A12, A16–A19, A22 and A23 on the chronology are month-and-weekday only, because every mini-summit index renders the same stale schedule table. The year-subdomains may hold the real dates. No dates were synthesised and none should be. | Open |
| N6 | Resolve or drop A26. Wardley Maps in Cyber Security — Panel surfaces on searches; no session page was found and participation is unconfirmed. Currently listed as unconfirmed rather than claimed. | Open |
| N7 | Four unrendered permissions maps, including "Hope Driven Development". Recorded by graphs.sgit.ai as existing; nhi.sgit.ai/hope/ contains no maps at all. Find them, render them, ship them. | Open |
Tasks — these do not need anybody
| # | Task | Status |
|---|---|---|
| T1 | Draw the map that shows us badly. Asked for explicitly in the corpus as the test of whether these maps are analysis or marketing. It does not exist. It would be the most credible single page on this site, and until it is drawn, every map here is one drawn by the party being mapped. | Open — first |
| T2 | Fix the thirteen broken map sources and render them. Two mundane causes — the wrong code fence, and one unquoted note. The pipeline exists and the parse rule is established. Thirteen dead code blocks become thirteen maps. Cheapest high-visibility win available. | Open |
| T3 | Draw the map of the PST pattern itself. Where do the three agent teams sit on an evolution axis? Where does the Villager-exclusive translator sit? Cheap, obvious, original, and it does not exist. | Open |
| T4 | Move pki.sgit.ai's two Wardley map pages here (10 maps between them) and leave stubs, as was done for the doctrine assessment. | Open |
| T5 | Convert the eight position tables into rendered maps. They are already Component | Visibility | Today | With our service, which is wardley-beta in all but syntax, and they carry the paired before/after structure that makes a map an argument. | Open |
| T6 | Archive the fragile items before they disappear. The SlideShare deck first — it is the only artefact of the Map Camp talk and the sole source for the crown-jewels thesis. Then the year-subdomains, the two LinkedIn shares, the two blog posts. The priority order. | Open |
| T7 | Write an .owm exporter. A site that wants to interoperate with the Wardley community currently has nothing to hand it. cli-owm and wardleyToGo both consume OWM text; the converter is small. | Open |
| T8 | Capture the four screenshots that are missing. Three returned a Cloudflare interstitial and one failed outright; all four are recorded as failures rather than published. They need a browser session a human is sitting in front of. | Open |
| T9 | Run the link-verification job. The job ships and fires weekly; until its first run, the verification page says plainly that no report exists rather than showing an empty table. | Scheduled |
Eight open questions, published without answers
| # | Question | Where it gets closest |
|---|---|---|
| Q1 | If the evolution axis encodes consensus rather than fact, what is a map's epistemic status? Matt Edgar's critique and this corpus's own "a map is a claim, not a picture" are the same worry from opposite directions, and neither says what to do about it. | The guardrail is a policy, not an answer |
| Q2 | When is a relabelled axis still a Wardley map? Does relabel when it evolves, use a maturity model when it merely improves hold for the risk and visibility overlays? | The custom-axis verdict |
| Q3 | Can you map a gap after all? "You cannot map a gap" is stated absolutely — and the air-gap map exists and is called the sharpest single map in the estate. | The contradiction, unresolved |
| Q4 | Is de-commoditisation a gap in doctrine or a misreading of it? The strongest counter — that ILC already covers a commodity enabling higher-order custom activity — has not been engaged with. | Stated on the page itself |
| Q5 | What makes an evolution placement defensible? The doctrine assessment demands every rating name its artefact. No map in the corpus attaches evidence to a single placement. Should they? | The discipline that provokes the question |
| Q6 | Should an agent be allowed to place components at all, or only to render placements a human has made? | — |
| Q7 | Does the PST-to-agent-team mapping actually improve outcomes, or is it a legible metaphor? There is no measurement, and one operationalised role definition out of 33 is thin evidence either way. | Asserted against implemented |
| Q8 | Who maintains a living map, now that we know nobody did? The map died on 26 February 2026 against the corpus's own warning. If the discipline failed with a named role and a stated responsibility, what would make it work? | /shipped/ |
Tensions
Seven things this site holds rather than resolves are listed on /shipped/, where they sit next to the evidence that produces them. They are not repeated here.