The schema layer is one of those parts that sounds technical until you realize it is really about who gets to define meaning. If Sign wants structured attestations to stay useful across systems, then who decides when a schema is stable enough to trust? What happens when policy changes but old attestations are still in circulation? If two institutions describe the same concept differently, is that still interoperability or just parallel logic with cleaner formatting? And if schema standardization becomes too dominant, does it improve clarity or quietly centralize control over how claims are understood? That is where this stops being format design and starts becoming governance.#signdigitalsovereigninfra $SIGN
SIGN
0.03215
+0.81%