RFID: which is better for supply chain traceability

EPCIS 2.0 is the GS1 standard for supply-chain event data, and epcis.dev is a capture gateway for it: post an event and the door validates it against GS1's own schema, stamps the capturing account — capturedBy, the warrantor, kept distinct from who, the attested observer — hashes it by CBV 2.0, and appends. That is the ground the topic above stands on.

Traceability holds only when the record would hold up out of context: validated at capture against GS1's official schema, identified by the standard's own hash, appended and never edited, with the capturing account stamped by the gateway rather than asserted by the sender. That is what turns a trace from a report someone compiled into evidence someone else can check.

The same door answers people and agents. Capture, query, get_event, trace and translate are exposed over MCP, so a logistics agent captures and queries with the same key a person would use, without a human copying values between two systems.

Two attributions travel with every event, and the door owns a different half of each. capturedBy is the warrantor — the account whose key opened the door — stamped by the gateway together with recordTime and the attestation grade, with caller-supplied values in those stamped fields stripped. who is the attested observer, asserted by the caller and graded by the door: it reaches only the grade claimed until identity attestation lands. One is stamped, the other is graded; they never merge.

Provenance: an aged epcis.dev page, kept at its original URL and refreshed into the current design on 15 August 2026.

Proof, not adjectives. The gateway's conformance tests pass against GS1's normative artifacts, and the calculators answer on this origin — POST /translate, /validate, /hash, no key. The dated ledger is What ships today.