Stakeholder

objects/Stakeholder.mapping.md

Mapped9 executable edges13 source fields2 review questions

Authored context

Notes / open questions

These notes are rendered from the mapping document and remain part of the review record.

name selects Name.legal_name → fullName; given/family-name components are not separately represented. INDIVIDUAL maps to Carta entityType=INDIVIDUAL, while INSTITUTION collapses to UNKNOWN.

current_relationship and current_relationships both map to Carta's single relationship; the array uses first_relationship_in_order, and NON_US_EMPLOYEE remaps to INTERNATIONAL_EMPLOYEE.

primary_contact/contact_info combine into the single email field according to stakeholder type; only the first selected email survives. addresses selects the first address's country into Carta's single address object; other contact/address data and tax_ids are dropped.

id and issuer_assigned_id map to Stakeholder.id and employeeId. June 22 makes Stakeholder.issuerId required, but issuer context is not a field on OCF Stakeholder; it must be supplied by the enclosing issuer context. current_status, comments, and object_type have no target; group remains Carta-only.

Review threads

Questions about this mapping

Property-level review threads stay close to the evidence. Open a prefilled issue for a new decision or follow the mapping link back to the authored file.

0 open2 closed

CLOSEDaddresses[].country

Should an OCF stakeholder address country also populate Carta `Compliance.countryOfResidency`? Investigate whether a two-hop stakeholder linkage is required and how the OCF alpha-2 value should be converted to Carta's alpha-3 code.

Asked by @johnscrudato · answered by @johnscrudato · objects/Stakeholder.mapping.md:256

Current answer Moot for this target snapshot: the June 22 bundle removed the `Compliance` definition, so `countryOfResidency` no longer exists and the `Target:` pointer was dropped. Neither sub-question was decided on the merits — whether `addresses[].country` is the intended residency source, whether a two-hop stakeholder linkage is needed, and how alpha-2 → alpha-3 conversion should work all remain undetermined and must be reopened if Carta reinstates a residency field.

Open issue ↗Mapping ↗

CLOSEDaddresses[].country_subdivision

Should an OCF stakeholder address subdivision also populate Carta `Compliance.stateOfResidency`? Investigate whether a two-hop stakeholder linkage is required and how the country-qualified ISO 3166-2 value should be constructed.

Asked by @johnscrudato · answered by @johnscrudato · objects/Stakeholder.mapping.md:260

Current answer Moot for this target snapshot: the June 22 bundle removed the `Compliance` definition, so `stateOfResidency` no longer exists and the `Target:` pointer was dropped. Neither sub-question was decided on the merits — whether `addresses[].country_subdivision` is the intended residency source, whether a two-hop stakeholder linkage is needed, and how the country-qualified ISO 3166-2 value should be constructed all remain undetermined and must be reopened if Carta reinstates a residency field.

Open issue ↗Mapping ↗

Field evidence

Where the OCF fields go

Variant	OCF field	Carta destination	Mapping kind
—	addresses	Stakeholder.address	select	Issue ↗
—	comments	No Carta target	unmappable	Issue ↗
—	contact_info	Stakeholder.email	combine	Issue ↗
—	current_relationship	Stakeholder.relationship	enum-remap	Issue ↗
—	current_relationships	Stakeholder.relationship	enum-remap	Issue ↗
—	current_status	No Carta target	unmappable	Issue ↗
—	id	Stakeholder.id	rename	Issue ↗
—	issuer_assigned_id	Stakeholder.employeeId	rename	Issue ↗
—	name	Stakeholder.fullName	select	Issue ↗
—	object_type	No Carta target	unmappable	Issue ↗
—	primary_contact	Stakeholder.email	combine	Issue ↗
—	stakeholder_type	Stakeholder.entityType	enum-remap	Issue ↗
—	tax_ids	No Carta target	unmappable	Issue ↗