Map master membership and child destinations
Synthetic master M-A contains consignments C1 for North and C2 for South. M-A has arrived at the hub. C1 later has recipient proof at North; C2 has none. The master hub event is an intermediate milestone, and the local completion report counts delivered children only from their own final proof.
| Constraint | Required record | Example decision rule |
|---|---|---|
| Membership | M-A → C1,C2 | Do not merge child identities |
| Milestone level | Master hub arrival versus child delivery | Hub arrival does not set both delivered |
| Final evidence | Recipient proof per child | Only C1 has final proof |
Test a parent event and a child event
| Case | Input | Expected decision |
|---|---|---|
| M-A hub arrival | C1/C2 are member records | No automatic final deliveries |
| C1 North proof | Final recipient record present | C1 delivered; C2 pending |
- Read master and children
- Classify event level
- Update supported milestone only
- Count final child proofs
A missing child membership link needs reconciliation; do not attach a similar destination merely to complete the parent.
What fraction of the two consignments has final delivery evidence?
Show the worked answer
One of two, 50%. Master hub arrival does not change C2’s pending recipient outcome.
Show both hierarchy levels in the acceptance export, including the pending child, rather than one whole-shipment delivered flag.