Skip to contents

The closed vocabulary of identity verdicts

identity_vocabulary.Rd

What the round observed about the person a request names, never what somebody should do about it. The distinction is the same one outcome makes: a verdict, not an instruction.

Usage

identity_vocabulary()

Value

A character vector of the five verdicts.

Details

Five words, and they are exhaustive over the two questions the resolution asks — how many accounts match the contact address, and whether the composed UPN is taken:

  • one match — existing, or created when the account was not there when the row was last looked at;

  • no match, composed UPN free — absent;

  • no match, composed UPN taken — collision;

  • more than one match — ambiguous.

absent is the one the four approved on 2026-08-07 were missing, and its absence was not an oversight: they assume resolving and creating are a single act, so the case became created at once. It does not, and a state that can last needs a name — for a creation that failed, and for the row a person is still looking at.

Only the first two admit an action: the gate refuses a row whose verdict is any of the other three, which is why the vocabulary being closed matters more here than a vocabulary usually does.