Contact and submission guidelines
This contact interface is intended to receive technical inquiries and requests for clarification regarding the editorial materials and representational artifacts published within pijubhash. Submissions that request clarification should describe the artifact or template of interest with sufficient metadata (identifier, version, and effective date when available) to enable precise reference. Queries that relate to methodological interpretation, schema constraints, or provenance fields are accepted for review; correspondence will be handled as administrative communication and is retained in the site correspondence register for provenance purposes. The environment is an independent reference and does not supply operational advice. Communications are processed to assist with editorial clarity, correction of documented artifacts, and to inform subsequent revisions of schemata and templates. Replies are factual and reference-specific, and responses focus on documentation and representational clarifications rather than operational instruction or prescriptive recommendations.
Correspondence schematic
A schematic representation of correspondence routing for editorial queries, showing provenance capture and reference tagging.
Submission requirements and data structure for queries
To facilitate precise handling, queries should include a minimal set of structured fields: artifact identifier (if referencing a template), document version or effective date, a concise description of the issue or question, and any supporting excerpt or matrix row references. Attachments are accepted for context but should be limited to representative excerpts rather than extensive datasets. When reporting inconsistencies, indicate the specific field name, the observed value, and the expected representation according to the schema where applicable. Provide contact details for the correspondent including name, organisational role where relevant, and a verifiable electronic contact. Submission metadata enables traceable records and supports the editorial revision protocol; it is preserved as provenance to permit auditors and reviewers to reconstruct the sequence of editorial interventions. The aim of the collection process is to maintain neutral, well-formed records of editorial dialogue and to support reproducible documentation practices.
Office and correspondence
Correspondence for editorial matters should be addressed to the postal and electronic contacts listed below. Postal correspondence that references a specific artifact should include the artifact identifier and version in the cover page to ensure correct routing and registration. Physical submissions of archival material should be arranged in advance by email to confirm reception procedures and to obtain receiving instructions. The office maintains provenance records and a correspondence register to enable traceable edits to published artifacts and templates. Retention and archival policies for correspondence are documented in the Privacy Policy and Terms of Service linked below.
16 Great Portland StreetLondon W1W 8QJ
United Kingdom
✉️ [email protected]
Processing expectations
Submitted inquiries are recorded and assigned a correspondence identifier for traceability. The record contains the submission metadata, the processing steps undertaken by editorial staff, and any structural changes that result from the inquiry. Publication revisions prompted by correspondence are recorded with explicit changelog entries that cite the correspondence identifier and describe the rationale for each change. The environment makes an effort to provide clarifying responses to factual or editorial questions; response times and handling procedures are administrative details and not guarantees of outcome. For privacy and retention practices, refer to the Privacy Policy.