The Beneficial Ownership Data Standard (BODS) is an open standard providing a specification for modelling and publishing information on the beneficial ownership and control of corporate vehicles
In BODS 0.4 we decided NOT to add a requirement to the effect that "the declarationSubject value of each Statement must match the recordId value of at least one other Statement". The rationale was that this is a stringent requirement which is a relatively heavy lift for the publisher without there being evidence that there is a need for it at the user end. Additionally, with clarity in 0.4 about representing changing BO info over time, there is at least one publishing pattern which would not align with this requirement. That is: a publisher might make regular snapshot datasets available, releasing delta files in between times. Minimal delta files wouldn't meet this additional requirement.
The same thing can be said about the existing (updated) requirement:
the interestedParty and subject values of a Relationship statement, when they are a recordId value, MUST match the recordId value of at least one other prior Statement in the array.
In BODS 0.4 we decided NOT to add a requirement to the effect that "the declarationSubject value of each Statement must match the recordId value of at least one other Statement". The rationale was that this is a stringent requirement which is a relatively heavy lift for the publisher without there being evidence that there is a need for it at the user end. Additionally, with clarity in 0.4 about representing changing BO info over time, there is at least one publishing pattern which would not align with this requirement. That is: a publisher might make regular snapshot datasets available, releasing delta files in between times. Minimal delta files wouldn't meet this additional requirement.
The same thing can be said about the existing (updated) requirement:
Consider the removal of this requirement.
Originally posted by @kd-ods in https://github.com/openownership/data-standard/issues/490#issuecomment-2068884555