Declaration Disputant

NIKOLAI proposal: a Declaration Disputant is the party — an organisation, or a recognised third-party evaluator — formally contesting an existing declared or shadow-mapping crosswalk row, as distinct from an organisation confirming or adding to one. This role exists to record disagreement, not just agreement, and remains entirely theoretical until NIKOLAI's first dispute is filed. This wording is a NIKOLAI editorial synthesis, not a quotation from any single source.

This is CASRAI's own proposed definition, not a definition any named organisation has agreed to. See what NIKOLAI is and is not.

Source of record

Where this definition comes from

ANSI/NISO Z39.104-2022 (CRediT, Contributor Roles Taxonomy), §1, Scope
“CRediT establishes a standardized set of roles to describe each author's individual contributions to the work, promoting transparency of contributions.”
https://www.niso.org/publications/z39104-2022-credit

Divergence

Where sources materially disagree

None of CRediT's 14 roles covers contesting another contributor's claim — CRediT has no dissent mechanism, since authorship disputes are handled outside the taxonomy entirely. This role has no CRediT counterpart; it follows only the general ANSI/NISO Z39.104-2022 contributor-role structure (a named party assigned a defined function against one specific record), applied to a function CRediT itself does not define.

Gap

As of nikolai-v0.2, filing a 'dispute' now has real, distinct effect: an approved dispute replaces the targeted crosswalk row's content with the disputing organisation's own corrected statement and is permanently flagged (disputed:true), rendered with distinct styling from a plain confirm. This was NOT true in the initial nikolai-v0.2 release -- an audit found the original approve() logic ran identically for confirm and dispute, so a filed dispute published looking exactly as authoritative as an endorsement, with the disputed content left untouched. Fixed the same day it was found; see casrai-nikolai-declarations.php's own header comment for the incident.