# Verification record — mu/nlta/vehicle-registration-mark-application@1.0.0 ## Candidate selection GOV-4610 ("GovSchema Standard Research"). Mauritius opened as the registry's 92nd jurisdiction via `mu/pio/passport-application` (GOV-4603), which banked three further STRONG verticals as open backlog: DMV (vehicle registration), Business Formation, and Visa. This schema authors the DMV candidate that same cycle had already independently byte-verified: the National Land Transport Authority's "Application for Registration Mark", `nlta.govmu.org/Documents/Downloads/Procedures%20Forms/Application%20Form%20Reg%20Mark.pdf`. Per the GOV-4603 record, the driving-licence half of Mauritius's DMV vertical (Police Form PF31) is in-person-only with no downloadable PDF found on `police.govmu.org`, and the online learner-licence channel carries a standing `govmu.org` notice that it remains "temporarily out of service due to Covid 19 Pandemic" — both confirmed dead ends this cycle by re-checking the same two sources fresh (no change). This candidate is therefore scoped to vehicle registration-mark allocation only, not driver's-licence issuance. ## Reaching the live source `https://nlta.govmu.org/Documents/Downloads/Procedures%20Forms/Application%20Form%20Reg%20Mark.pdf` - Plain unauthenticated `curl` request (with `-L` to follow redirects), no session/cookie state, no CAPTCHA/WAF challenge. - HTTP 200, **598,726 bytes** retrieved. - sha256 of the retrieved bytes: `dc757ea9fbb495b9a00117cb04d37a63a90729f51ed6e63bffbdea99d462df89`. - 1 page, confirmed via `pdfjs-dist`'s `numPages`. - `getAnnotations()` returned 0 annotations and `getTextContent()` returned 0 text items — a flat, scanned/rasterized image embedded in the PDF, not an interactive AcroForm and not a text-layer specimen. ### Authority attribution The document's own header reads "NATIONAL LAND TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MSI BUILDING, ROYAL ROAD, LES CASSIS, PORT LOUIS", and is hosted directly on the Authority's own domain (`nlta.govmu.org`). `authority` is attributed to the National Land Transport Authority (abbreviation NLTA) directly. ## Extraction method Since neither the text-content nor annotation layers yielded anything (a pure scanned-image PDF), the single page was rendered to a 1488x2104 PNG at 2.5x scale via `pdfjs-dist` + the vendored `node-canvas` build (per this registry's own `gov-form-pdf-extraction` precedent for image-only specimens) and read visually. The scan is clean and high-contrast — every label, box grid, and checkbox is legibly rendered with no glyph-rendering failures of the kind this registry has seen on other rasterized specimens. ## Document structure A single page, five numbered items plus an "OFFICIAL USE" box and a closing "NOTE TO APPLICANTS": - **Item 1** — "Full name and address of applicant (Applicable for individual applicants)": (a) Title, (b) Surname (Block letters), (c) Other names (Block letters), (d) Permanent address (Block letters, three ruled lines), (e) National Identity Card Number. - **Item 2** — "Full name and address of applicant (Applicable for registered companies, etc.)": (a) Name (Block letters), (b) Address (Block letters, three ruled lines), (c) Registered Corporate Number. - **Item 3** — "Name of dealer from which the vehicle is to be purchased (Block letters)". - **Item 4** — "Who will be effecting the registration of the vehicle? (Please tick as appropriate)": Dealer / Purchaser / Other (please specify), three checkbox-style options printed inline. - **Item 5** — "Declaration": "I apply for registration mark ______"; "I undertake to purchase / reserve * the registration mark upon approval of the request. (* Delete as appropriate)"; "I, ......, declare that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the particulars given above are true and correct."; "Signature of applicant: .......... Status: .......... (Applicable for registered companies only)"; "Date: [Date][Month][Year]". - **OFFICIAL USE** (excluded in its entirety, officer-only): Received on, Receipt No, Name of Officer, Signature of Officer, Approved by Deputy Road Transport Commissioner, Date Approved. - **NOTE TO APPLICANTS** (informational, not a field): instructs applicants to ensure particulars in Item 1 or 2 are accurate, and states the NLTA reserves the right not to allocate a Registration Mark without prejudice to the applicant. ## Scope: fields and sections excluded - The "OFFICIAL USE" box in its entirety — Received on, Receipt No, Name and Signature of Officer, Deputy Road Transport Commissioner approval and date — all filled by NLTA staff, not the applicant, the same "officer-only, not applicant-supplied data" convention this registry applies elsewhere (e.g. `mu/pio/passport-application`'s own excluded "OFFICIAL USE" boxes). - The "NOTE TO APPLICANTS" closing text — informational only, no blank or box to complete. ## Scope: judgment calls on requiredness This source carries no asterisk/mandatory-marking convention at all (its one asterisk, on Item 5's "purchase / reserve *", is a delete-as- appropriate instruction, not a required-field marker), so requiredness was assigned by engineering judgment: 1. **`applicantType` discriminator, not itself a printed field.** The form provides two mutually exclusive sections captioned "Applicable for individual applicants" and "Applicable for registered companies, etc.". Modelled the same way as `tt/rgd/partnership-beneficial-ownership-statement`'s `declarantCategory` — an explicit selector gating which section's fields are `requiredWhen` that value, rather than making both sections' fields unconditionally optional. 2. **`individualTitle` modelled as free text, not an enum.** Unlike `mu/pio/passport-application`'s `title` field, this specimen prints no enumerated options (Mr/Mrs/Miss) next to the boxed letters — just a run of blank boxes captioned "Title" — so this schema does not invent options the source does not itself show. 3. **`individualPermanentAddress`/`companyAddress` modelled as a single free-text field, not split into line1/line2/line3.** The three ruled lines beneath each caption carry no distinct sub-labels (e.g. street/town/district) on this specimen, unlike some other registry address fields that do print such sub-captions — modelled here matching this form's own undifferentiated layout. 4. **`dealerName` modelled optional.** Item 3 is not gated on Item 4's answer anywhere on the form, and Item 4 itself offers "Purchaser" and "Other" as alternatives to "Dealer", implying a dealer is not always party to the transaction (e.g. a private resale or personal import of an already-registered vehicle needing a new mark) — so this field is not marked unconditionally required. 5. **`registeringParty`/`registrationMarkApplied`/`undertakingType`/ `declarantFullName`/`signatureOfApplicant`/`declarationDate` modelled required**, as the form's own core operative content (which the declaration explicitly swears to and which the Authority needs to process any registration-mark request), consistent with this registry's standard approach of treating a document's own declaration/signature block as required absent contrary evidence. 6. **`signatoryStatus` gated required on `applicantType` = `company`**, matching the field's own printed qualifier, "(Applicable for registered companies only)". ## Conformance 2 mock scenarios were reasoned through by hand against this schema's own `fields[]` conditions (not committed as fixture files, following this registry's own precedent for single flat-image DMV/short-form specimens, e.g. `tt/rgd/partnership-beneficial-ownership-statement`): (1) an individual applicant buying a used car directly from another private individual with no dealer involved, self-registering — `applicantType` = `individual` requires `individualTitle`/`individualSurname`/ `individualOtherNames`/`individualPermanentAddress`/ `individualNationalIdentityCardNumber`; `companyName`/`companyAddress`/ `companyRegisteredCorporateNumber` and `signatoryStatus` correctly not required; `dealerName` left blank (optional); `registeringParty` = `purchaser`, so `registeringPartyOtherSpecify` not required; (2) a registered company purchasing a new vehicle from a named dealer, with the dealer effecting registration — `applicantType` = `company` requires `companyName`/`companyAddress`/`companyRegisteredCorporateNumber` and `signatoryStatus`; the individual-track fields correctly not required; `dealerName` populated; `registeringParty` = `dealer`. Every `requiredWhen` condition in this schema (`applicantType` twice, `registeringParty`) was exercised at least once true and once false across the two scenarios. Validated clean with `node tools/validate.mjs` and `node tools/validate-ajv.mjs` (ajv 2020-12 against `spec/v0.3/govschema.schema.json`). `registry-index.json` regenerated via `npm run build-index` in `tools/govschema-client/`. Models 18 `fields[]` across 4 steps. No `documents[]` entries — this specimen discloses no supporting-document checklist anywhere on its single page, unlike this registry's other Mauritius schema (`mu/pio/passport-application`), which does print one.