Problem / Need: What this requirement solves
Uploaded proof documents currently retain the source filename supplied by staff or the sender. That filename is then visible in the company record and to the recipient. Participants noted that source filenames can be unclear, inconsistent, or unsuitable for a public-facing filing record.
A consistent system-generated name would make documents easier to understand and identify. However, the session did not approve a naming convention, and participants noted that the design must account for both single and multiple uploaded documents.
Scope
Included
- Define an approved display-name convention for proof documents associated with a Continuation Out filing.
- Apply naming consistently where the document appears in:
- the staff filing record;
- the client-facing record or ledger;
- applicable email attachments or links.
- Support one or multiple uploaded documents.
- Preserve traceability to the original file where required for audit or investigation.
Explicitly excluded
- Changing document content.
- Removing original-filename metadata without records-management and privacy review.
Problem / Need: What this requirement solves
Uploaded proof documents currently retain the source filename supplied by staff or the sender. That filename is then visible in the company record and to the recipient. Participants noted that source filenames can be unclear, inconsistent, or unsuitable for a public-facing filing record.
A consistent system-generated name would make documents easier to understand and identify. However, the session did not approve a naming convention, and participants noted that the design must account for both single and multiple uploaded documents.
Scope
Included
Explicitly excluded