No integration has ever been delivered.

The offer

Your own register, held to this standard

A council's planning register. A company's site list, asset inventory or lease schedule. You already hold it, so the licence question that has stopped every external source this project has assessed does not arise — it is your data. What you may not have is a way to prove to somebody who does not trust you that the numbers are what they say.

None of this requires DwellDelta to hold your data, and today none of it could — see the absences further down. Your file stays where it is.

The method

Four habits, and every one is already on this site

These are not intentions. Each is a rule this project already applies to itself, and each is checkable on a page you can read right now — which is the only kind of evidence available to something that has no customers.

• The licence is read and recorded before the data is usedAs read, not as assumed. One candidate feed was recorded NO-GO on its own terms — NonCommercial and NoDerivatives — rather than used and argued about later. The preloaded boundaries here were chosen public-domain over an OpenStreetMap-derived set specifically because share-alike would bind every database derived from them.In use
• Coverage is stated as a quantity, not implied2,641 of 2,644 Australian postal areas, with the three absent codes named and explained. Suburbs: New South Wales only. Roads and lots: five postcodes. A count can be wrong and be corrected. “Comprehensive coverage” can be neither.In use
• Every input is hashedEach file that ships is recorded with its SHA-256, and the record the pages are checked against carries the digest of the record it was copied from. A substituted input becomes detectable rather than arguable.In use
• Claims are sized to their evidence — including where the check does not reachThe data page states that its own tests bind the totals and not the per-source rows, and that this was confirmed by mutating eight figures and watching the suite stay green. A limit found by the people who built the thing is the only kind that ever gets published.In use

The data page is the worked example — not a description of one. It is a real ledger over a real dataset under real licences, with the digest of the record it was copied from printed on it and a test that fails if page and record ever disagree. That is the shape of what this work produces. Read it as the deliverable.

The honest shape

It removes the hardest problem here, and introduces three

Data you already hold removes the third-party licence question entirely, by construction — and that question is the single thing that has stopped every external source this project has assessed. It does not touch three others, and those three have never been scheduled here. Both halves are the offer; one half would be a sales pitch.

• Removed — the third-party licence questionNo fee, no terms to accept, no redistribution authority to obtain, no NonCommercial clause to trip over, no provider to wait on.By construction
• Not touched — privacyA planning register or a site list can carry personal information. The classification work that would establish whether yours does has not been done, here or anywhere in this project.Unscheduled
• Not touched — tenant isolationThere is no identity, no authorization and no separation between one organisation's data and another's.Unscheduled
• Not touched — commercial sensitivityA site list is often the most commercially sensitive file an organisation owns. Handling that is a controls question, and there are no controls here to describe.Unscheduled

“The customer owns it” is not a defence available to a processor.

From the internal advisory that assessed this exact proposition

Those three are one roadmap row — identity, authorization, tenant isolation, audit, session and account deletion. It is not on the roadmap, and a test in a sibling repository fails if anyone adds it. That is how a boundary that has been declined stays declined instead of drifting. It is stated here because “not yet built” and “deliberately not opened” are different sentences to anyone who has to sign a data-sharing agreement, and a reader deciding whether to send a file is entitled to know which one applies.

Measured absences

What would have to exist first

This is the list a supplier is not supposed to publish. It is here because it is the list that decides whether any of the above is real, and because somebody who cannot tell you what they have not built has not looked.

• There is no import pathThe product's evidence is a frozen object compiled into its own bundle. Nothing reads a file in, and nothing writes one out.Absent
• The read interface answers on loopback onlyIt is released and covered by tests, and it refuses to bind anywhere but 127.0.0.1. No address resolves to it.Not deployed
• Geography outside Australia and New South Wales is refusedNot a coverage gap to be filled later — a check that declines the input.Refused
• Two licence assertions are wrong for real dataIngest currently forces every observation to “terms not applicable” and every permitted use to “permitted”. That is safe only because the data is invented. For data belonging to somebody else, redistribution has to be recorded as not permitted — a replacement, not a deletion.Would have to change
• Nobody has ever tested any of itNo integration delivered, no file received, no deployment, no money taken.Never done

Every line above was read out of the repositories rather than recalled, which is the same standard the rest of this site holds. It is also the reason this page can be believed about the things it does claim.

Contact

If those limits are acceptable, start with one register

One dataset, one licence position, one coverage statement, one set of digests. Not a programme — the smallest piece of work that produces something you can hand to somebody who does not trust you, together with a written list of what it does not establish.

• What you bringOne dataset you already hold, and the name of the third party you need to convince.Yours
• What comes backA source record: the licence as read, coverage as a count, a digest for every input file, and the limits stated as plainly as the findings.The deliverable
• Where the data sitsWhere it sits now. There is nowhere to send it — no environment exists that could receive it — and building something that received it would open the three questions above rather than answer them.Unchanged

The route. There is no form on this page and none anywhere on this site. There is no address printed here either, and that is the same rule the rest of the site follows: things are recorded when they exist, not before. No mailbox has been created, so printing one would be this page's first false claim. If someone sent you this page, replying to them reaches whoever wrote it; if nobody did, there is no route today — a worse answer than a form, and a truer one. A mailbox goes in this paragraph the day one exists, and it will be a mailbox rather than a form: a form implies something is standing by to receive it.

A useful first message is four lines — the dataset, who holds it, the licence or terms it is held under if that is known, and the third party you need to convince. That is enough for either side to say whether this is worth the time.