The appointing party sets out, within the asset information standard, any particular information standards its organization requires, weighing: (a) exchanges within its own organization; with outside stakeholders; with any lead appointed party working under ISO 19650-2; between itself and a prospective lead appointed party; among prospective leads sharing one asset management and operation team; and among teams that depend on or follow one another; (b) how information is structured and classified under the ISO 12006-2 framework; (c) how level of information need is assigned; (d) use of the information in any future delivery phase; and (e) its use in the operational phase.
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.