Rule · BLOCKER

COMMON.IXBRL_TAGGING

Inline XBRL (iXBRL) compliance and ESMA metadata tagging

Citation: Art. 2 Regulation (EU) 2024/2984
Canonical form: Art. 2 VO (EU) 2024/2984
Runs for: Annex I · other crypto-assets; Annex II · asset-referenced tokens; Annex III · e-money tokens
Severity if open: BLOCKER
Section key: none: checks the file format
Minimum words: 0
Listed terms (English): none
Listed terms (German): none
Package version: 1.2.1, built from source that may include unreleased changes
Source: rules/common.py

How the status is set

Missing: the draft is JSON, DOCX, PDF or Markdown.
Review: the draft is XHTML. The check reports namespace problems and always adds that tag completeness was not checked.
Pass: never. This is a fail-closed format gate.

Legal basis

Art. 2 Regulation (EU) 2024/2984

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg_impl/2024/2984/oj/eng

Not re-verified since these pages were introduced (2026-10-20): EUR-Lex was unreachable from the build environment. The citation is the rule's own, unchanged.

Synthetic examples

Each example is linted when this page is generated. The build fails if a result differs.

MissingAny JSON draft

A JSON, DOCX, PDF or Markdown draft cannot carry Inline XBRL, so the blocker stays open. An XHTML file is checked for the Inline XBRL 1.1 and ESMA MiCA taxonomy namespaces and then shows Review, because tag completeness needs a taxonomy validator.

{
  "title": "Synthetic rule example",
  "type": "other",
  "sections": {}
}

Limitations

Reads no section. It checks the file format, so adding a section to a draft cannot change its status.
Checks the file format and taxonomy namespace only, not tag completeness.
Status and severity are fixed by the rule. A draft cannot waive or downgrade them.
This rule never reports Pass.

Disagree with this rule, or missing one? Propose a rule change.