fix(kb): close all six Zeugnis discrepancies on the user's rulings
D1/D2 - Bosch title and promotion: CONFIRMED by the user. The promotion and its
timing are correct and came from a re-grading (Neueinstufung). The Zeugnis does
not contradict it - it names DEPARTMENTS ("Ingenieur" in Fertigungstechnologie
1/2/3) rather than job titles. Separately corrected a false provenance note that
claimed official_title was "the formal combined string on the Zeugnis"; it never
came from that document, it comes from the user and LinkedIn.
D3 - part-time from 2021-09: NOT recorded, by the user's decision. Noted for
completeness that tenure wording such as "over ten years" measures elapsed time
and is unaffected; it would only matter if a document claimed FTE years, and
none does.
D4 - French and Italian: the Swisscom Zwischenzeugnis says he uses both
professionally on a regular basis. The user reviewed the sentence and confirmed
it is an ERROR IN THE DOCUMENT. DE/EN only stands. Recorded in
identity.language_note so nobody rediscovers the line and acts on it, with the
practical warning that a reader of that Zeugnis may take it at face value.
D5 - the RUAG MSSQL rule-out: the DECISION stands (user does not want it
revisited), the REASONING is corrected. Two of its four premises were wrong:
MSSQL is not 0 (Fraunhofer SCEDAS ran on Microsoft SQL Server), and "his stack
is AWS cloud-native" was too narrow - the Swisscom Zeugnis documents component
ownership for ETL into the Teradata DWH. Talend and SAP S/4HANA remain genuinely
0, and the required line reads "Aufbau UND Betrieb" while he has documented
Betrieb only - so the skip is still defensible, it was just better than its
written justification. Both RUAG decision rows now carry the correction and a
standing rule for future DWH postings.
D6 - Vizrt end date: 2018-05 stands by the user's decision.
And the follow-through that matters: the data-warehouse, MSSQL and mentoring
evidence is now IN THE BUNDLES, not only in claims.json. BS-6 showed last week
that evidence which reaches no bundle cannot be selected - this is the same
failure mode, caught the same week. The DWH entry carries its scope limit
explicitly: documented Betrieb, not Aufbau.
Validator PASS, 37/37 tests.
Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Qej5SBvhcbGXHwLqNWiskM
This commit is contained in:
1 parent
d702c4bc0c
commit
f515a1e522
4 files changed
+54
-49
No files matched your search
@@ -141,3 +141,22 @@ Kubernetes, Docker, AWS (S3 · Glue · Athena · Redshift · CloudFormation), Ka
|
||||
- Claiming SRE/pure DevOps title (you were a data engineer with platform ownership)
|
||||
- Overstating Terraform/Helm experience (not confirmed — do not claim)
|
||||
- Mentioning SCEDAS, maritime research, BDD, or RPA
|
||||
|
||||
## Data-warehouse and mentoring evidence (added 2026-09-11 from the Arbeitszeugnisse)
|
||||
|
||||
Both were documented all along and reached no bundle, so the selection paths could not see them.
|
||||
Same failure mode as BS-6 (Linux/Ansible), found the same week.
|
||||
|
||||
- **Data warehouse (SW-2).** The Swisscom Zwischenzeugnis documents *Komponentenverantwortung* for
|
||||
the ETL pipelines that load business-critical Fulfillment data from Oracle into the **Teradata
|
||||
Data Warehouse (DWH)**. Use this whenever a JD names data warehousing — it was previously
|
||||
screened as absent, which cost a correct answer on at least one posting.
|
||||
**Scope limit:** this is documented **Betrieb** (operation) of a DWH, not **Aufbau**
|
||||
(construction). A required line saying *"Aufbau und Betrieb von Data-Warehouse-Lösungen"* is only
|
||||
half met — say which half.
|
||||
- **Microsoft SQL Server (FC-1).** Fraunhofer's SCEDAS ran on MSSQL with C# and Entity Framework.
|
||||
Historical and single-project; do not present it as data-platform depth.
|
||||
- **Mentoring (BS-7).** *"Fachliche Betreuung von Studierenden, auch im Rahmen von
|
||||
Abschlussarbeiten"* — documented technical supervision, including thesis supervision. Use it when
|
||||
a JD asks about developing other engineers (SBB asked explicitly and the answer had to fall back
|
||||
on team roles). **Technical supervision, NOT people management.**
|
||||
Reference in new issue
Block a user