Context
The handover from construction completion to operations is the single largest information-loss event in the life of a complex asset. Drawings get re-issued as PDFs, requirements registers stop being maintained, design rationale evaporates. Operations teams inherit a fraction of what was created during design and construction.
In a traditional setup the handover is a milestone. In Weaver it is a non-event.
Explanation
Three structural reasons handover disappears as a problem:
There's nothing to hand over
In a traditional setup, design data lives in the contractor's tools and gets handed over to the operator's tools at construction completion. In Weaver, the data lives in the operator's CDE from day one. The contractor's tools federate into it. There is nothing to migrate at handover because nothing moved.
The history travels with the data
Every change, every approval, every design rationale captured during construction is preserved. Five years into operations, when a maintenance engineer asks 'why was this valve specified at this rating?', the SPARQL query returns the original requirement, the engineer who signed off, and the supporting calculation.
The metamodel doesn't change
The ISO 15926-11 classes used during design are the same classes used in operations. The data shape an asset has in its operational maintenance system is the same shape it had on the day it was specified. Migration is unnecessary because the model is continuous.
For 70-year assets, the handover problem isn't just expensive, it is structurally damaging. Decisions get made on incomplete information for the rest of the asset's life. Weaver's architecture removes the problem by removing the boundary.