RevRec brainstorm · Supporting · Exhaustiveness review
19 — Exhaustiveness review
Date: 2026-07-31
Purpose: Honest check — are we complete enough to share as an e2e design pack?
1. What “exhaustive” means here
| Axis | Exhaustive? | Evidence |
|---|---|---|
| Zuora capability inventory mapped | Yes | Doc 16 §2 — row per capability in research map 2.1–2.10 |
| ASC 606 five-step + mods + VC + balances + RPO | Yes (engineering) | Doc 15 + PDF paragraph index; not full FASB reprint |
| Domain write model | Yes | Doc 14 entities, apply API, state machines, identities |
| Architecture from model | Yes | Doc 18 + ADR 0004 |
| AC boundary | Yes | Doc 17 + ADR 0006 + PRD alignment |
| Smoke → policy quarry | Yes (theme-level) | Doc 16 smoke section; 317 case specs live in revanu |
| Chargebee event map | Yes (foundation streams) | Doc 16 + 03 |
| Numeric golden scenarios | Partial | S01–S04 in doc 04; S05+ and full smoke amounts still quarry |
| UI/UX IA | Thin | Personas in 10; screens not designed here |
| Exact prod SLOs / fat-tenant metrics | Open measurement | Architecture ready; numbers TBD |
| Implementation code | Out of scope | Design pack only |
2. Coverage heatmap (product outcomes)
| Area | Foundation | Complete | Enterprise-deep | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contract/PO/schedule engine | ● | ● | ○ | Model includes multi-PO; delivery slices |
| Mods prospective/cumulative/separate | ● | ● | ○ | Retro-prospective advanced in Complete+ |
| SSP relative / residual / analyzer | ○ | ● | ● | Analyzer = Enterprise-deep |
| Usage / VC constraint | ○ | ● | ● | |
| Delivery / PSD / milestones | ○ | ● | ● | |
| Close + journals + audit | ● | ● | ● | SOX workbench UX = deeper |
| RPO / disclosures | ○ | ● | ● | |
| Multi-currency / multi-entity / multi-book | ○ | ● | ● | Multi-book deepest |
| Cost/commission amortization | — | ○ | ● | Separate pack ok |
| AR + AC journals | ● | ● | ● | AC owns journaling |
| ERP connectors | export ● | ● | ● | Catalyst-class sync Out |
| RC template engine clone | — | — | — | Out (outcome via domain Contract) |
3. Gaps to deepen next (design, not code)
- Worked numeric examples for cumulative mod + CN overflow + unbilled (extend doc 07).
- Formal JSON schemas for canonical events + recognition facts.
- Compat projection field dictionary (SO-shaped DTO ↔ Contract/PO).
- Close checklist / control report catalog (finance-facing).
- Pull fat-tenant volume stats when available → fill NFR numbers in doc 13.
4. Framing correction (2026-07-31)
Earlier drafts over-indexed on “don’t clone incumbent ETL.” That is not the architecture method.
Method now: domain model → system properties → component roles → technologies (18).
Legacy systems matter only as: (a) smoke/policy quarry, (b) migration adapters.
5. Single-file share
revrec-next-compendium.html — self-contained HTML with all design markdown inlined, sidebar nav, anchors. Deploy/share that one file.