Table A.11 grades nine data preparation techniques: functional testing (Table A.13) M at every level; tabular specification methods and domain specific language R throughout; simulation R at Basic Integrity and HR above; checklists R at Basic Integrity, HR at SIL 1 and 2 and M at SIL 3 and 4; Fagan inspection R at SIL 1 to 4; formal design reviews R at Basic Integrity and HR above; formal proof that the data are correct HR at SIL 3 and 4 only; walkthrough R to SIL 2 and HR at SIL 3 and 4. Approved combinations: SIL 1 and 2, tabular specification with functional testing; SIL 3 and 4, tabular specification, functional testing, checklists and formal design reviews, or domain specific language, simulation, functional testing, checklists and Fagan inspection.
This control maps to 1 controls across 1 other frameworks. If you already hold one of them, the evidence you collected for it is the starting point here rather than new work.
Every mapping shown was judged rather than inferred from wording similarity, and the ones that failed review are published too. See the coverage reports and what was rejected.
The graph holds this control, the 1 it maps to, and the evidence behind each claim, over MCP and REST.