Above the record and the plant
TLA-185 describes what is true about a taxon. TLA-VIS describes how one plant looks when drawn. A rendered planting (many instances on a site) sits above both. That composition layer is a product gap, not more species fields.
How the two published instruments already split
TLA-185 is the species record grammar: fields, disclosure, climate screening. What is true about a taxon in a project record.
TLA-VIS is the plant visualisation grammar: habit and condition mapped to renderable parameters. How one plant looks when drawn. It complements TLA-185; it does not replace it. Geometry stays in glTF or USD.
A rendered composition sits above both: many plant instances (each a record key, a visualisation condition, and a transform), plus site and layout semantics such as spacing, layers, beds, paths, and camera or sheet views. That is not more species fields. Numbering it as another field-registry revision would fight the rule that new TLA-xxx numbers are for incompatible field-registry changes. Export profiles for IFC, GIS, and USD already stay bindings of the records spine, not new TLAs. The same logic applies here.
What a composition layer would carry
Practices and delivery tools need a way to describe the mix without inventing a second plant factory:
- Composition identity and provenance: authorship, which archive build, licence of the mix
- Instance list: taxon key → visualisation slots → pose, scale, age, and condition
- Spatial structure: beds, layers, constraints, optional site envelope
- Views: projection (one-point, two-point, axo, plan, section), camera, framing (including rule of thirds), and render style; sheet role stays illustration unless the record says otherwise
- Delivery: a scene package that references approved meshes and stills
Names and timing
If a Foundation instrument is named later, letter-coded titles such as TLA-COMP, TLA-SCENE, or TLA-PLT fit better than a field-count bump. None of those names is minted here.
Until Studio+ or the farm can emit the same composition twice, the practical path is ordinary glTF or USD plus a private JSON sidecar that points at the published records and visualisation grammars. Promote that sidecar only when the shape stabilises: the same path visualisation took relative to the records spine.
The gap is real. A ratified third standard is not. This note names the layer so practices and implementers can talk about it without mistaking a render for a species record, or a species record for a planting plan.
Next Steps
Open Foundation materials for one studio deliverable are on the adoption guide. Citing the grammar stays free under CC BY-NC-ND.
Commercial documentation rights and AU Library depth are on Professional Membership at landscapearchive.com.au — not a fee to unlock the TLA-185 PDF.