Market analysis

This page positions dossiq against the systems a municipality or an SMB would otherwise buy. It was first written before any competitor had been installed, and it read like it: every landscape table was a set of claims from feature pages. Since September 2026 the numbers on this page are measured. Thirty columns stand in the parity ledger, twenty-six of them installed and driven, and every score below is a yes count on the 180 domain-neutral rows, as of ledger v10.1 and gap register v4.1 (2026-09-14). The method, the counting rule, the statutory split and the full ranking are on competitor parity, September 2026; the links behind every cell are on competitor sources. A second sweep asked what these systems have that our list never thought to ask, and it is on competitor discovery, September 2026.

Summary

Case management is coordination: tracking work, assigning it, meeting deadlines, managing documents and recording decisions. Nextcloud already provides tasks, files, chat, calendar and activity, and dossiq orchestrates those rather than rebuilding them. That is still the positioning, and the driving confirmed the part of it that can be measured: Deck, a kanban board on the same host, passes seven of the 23 document rows through one fact, that an attachment is a file in Files, and dossiq gets six of those on the same host for the same price.

What the driving refuted is the claim that nothing else occupies the space. OpenCase, a Danish municipal case system on Nextcloud, scores 58 of 180. Two forks of a German service desk, OTOBO and Znuny, and the project module of a Belgian ERP, Odoo, score 78, 73 and 78 against dossiq's 71. Frappe Helpdesk passes us by a single row, 72. dossiq is seventh of twenty-six driven columns on the comparable half, behind xxllnc Zaken at 125 and GZAC at 82 in its own family. Where dossiq leads is where the law is: 6 of 7 decision rows, 8 of 10 deadline rows, and 13 statutory yes answers that no non-Dutch system scores at all.

What changed since July

The claims this page made before the driving, and what the corpus found. Rows cite procest/… files in ConductionNL/market-intelligence, or the gap register at procest/_gaps/.

the page said	what was measured	replaced by
"No case management solution exists in Nextcloud."	OpenCase 1.1.0 (Lamotech) is a municipal case system on Nextcloud, driven in round 2: 62 yes of 206, 58 of 180. Deck scores 37 of 180 (_round4/compare/eighteen-system-tally.md).	The Nextcloud ecosystem table below, with both columns.
"Nextcloud Deck: Kanban board for tasks, not case management."	Measured at 37 of 180, level with Kanboard, and the first non-Dutch column to pass seven document rows, all of them Nextcloud's (nextcloud-deck/round4/open-core.md). Batch 12 found two more that reach seven and eight with document managers of their own, Tuleap CE and Huly. A card is not a case, which is eleven honest no answers.	The same table.
"Jira Service Management: developer-friendly ITSM, not case management."	Rated from its documentation at 83 of 180, above every driven non-Dutch column, graded documented, not driven and printed as an upper bound (_round4/compare/findings-batch8.md).	The issue and ticket family table.
Redmine as the open-source comparison a buyer will name.	A buyer comparing dossiq to "Redmine" is quite likely being shown Easy Redmine 16.0, rated from documents at 86 of 180. Its core is Redmine under GPL-2.0; everything Easy wrote sits beside it under a commercial licence the cloud buyer may not even read (_round4/compare/open-core-batch10.md).	The issue and ticket family table, and the eleventh open-core shape.
"Valtimo/GZAC: proprietary core (Ritense)."	The monorepo is public under EUPL-1.2 and was driven: 86 of 206, 82 of 180. Open core only partly: two closed-published npm packages in the release build (valtimo/round2/).	The Dutch government table.
"OpenZaak: API-only, no end-user UI."	OpenZaak itself was not driven. Its municipal frontend, Dimpact ZAC, was read: 69 yes, 61 partial, 76 no on 206, and it owns no data, so 26 of its 76 misses cite an external component (zac/round3/).	The Dutch government table, ZAC as a column with its caveat.
"No CRM-to-case flow: no competitor has native request-to-case conversion with a built-in CRM."	Row 1.3, create a case from a contact record: xxllnc Zaken yes, dossiq partial, owner dossiq (_gaps/gap-register.md). Odoo ties the top of the non-Dutch corpus from a platform whose CRM sits in the same tree.	Withdrawn. The row is a dossiq gap.
"Federated cross-org cases: no case system has this. Only Dossiq can share case data across organizations."	Never measured as a matrix row.	Withdrawn as a superlative; kept below as a design claim, marked unmeasured.
"Calendar-native deadlines" as an advantage.	The deadline engine is the largest measured defect: 30.4% of the terms dossiq stores land on a Saturday, Sunday or Dutch holiday, and nothing rolls them to the next working day as the Algemene termijnenwet requires (_round4/compare/deadline-engines.md). OpenProject has the best engine in the corpus.	The risks table, first row.
"Talk rooms per case: no BPM engine has this."	Not measured. What round 2 did measure: no competitor composes another product into the case page, which dossiq does with mail, appointments, decisions and hours as leaf tabs (_round2/compare/M3-integrations.md).	Replaced by the measured sentence.
"Heavyweight deployment: BPM engines require Java/Spring stacks."	The four non-Dutch systems above dossiq are Perl (OTOBO, Znuny), Python (Odoo) and Python on a low-code framework (Frappe Helpdesk). Deployment weight decided nothing in the ranking.	Dropped from the gap table.
"~40-50% infrastructure free."	An unmeasured percentage. The measured version is Deck's seven document rows through Files, six of which dossiq gets on the same host (_round4/compare/fourteen-system-tally.md).	The measured sentence.
Risk: "Feature gap vs enterprise BPM: high."	Camunda and Flowable were never driven. The measured risk is elsewhere: two help-desk forks and an ERP's project module outscore dossiq on the comparable half, and dossiq is the only no in the ledger on watchers (13.18).	The risks table.
Enterprise SaaS prices per user per month.	Unverified marketing figures. ServiceNow is docs only in the ledger and was never rated; Monday.com, Power Automate and Kissflow are not in the ledger at all.	Removed.

One claim this page never made, and a buyer does. A depth study read what a kenmerk can actually do, 54 capabilities over eleven systems and dossiq, and dossiq comes eleventh of twelve. xxllnc Zaken scores 43, Valtimo 34 and Dimpact ZAC with OpenZaak Catalogi behind it 33, against dossiq's 21. The gap is concentrated rather than spread: dossiq scores zero yes on the thirteen field types, which is the half a demo is made of, and is competitive only on case-type structure, the half the ZGW model gave us. The ranking, the four groups and the second reader who recounted ZAC, Valtimo and OpenCase are on competitor discovery, September 2026, from _round4/discovery/casetype-configurability.md.

What the discovery sweep left open, Ruben closed on 2026-09-14. Twenty-two decisions were taken, and six differ from what the file recommended: revive all five parked candidates, set the promotion bar on relevance rather than on passer count, put the archiving process in openregister rather than filinq, use openregister's existing soft delete rather than a new recycle state, give the mail account to Nextcloud Mail rather than integriq, and re-rate the twenty not candidates with an MKB lens because the product serves a broad market including MKB. Each decision and its reasoning is on competitor discovery, September 2026.

Two July workup claims the register also corrected: "Zaaktype versioning" was marked shipped, and the matrix reads a version chain on workflowTemplate only (row 2.3, narrowed to S by the re-read); "Delegation / vervanging & waarneming" was marked shipped, and the registration exists while the list half has no call site (row 13.17). Both are in the re-read and the OpenSpec umbrella.

1. Competitive landscape

Scores are yes of the 180 domain-neutral rows, with the combined 206-row figure in brackets where the corpus prints it. driven means installed, seeded with Dutch municipal cases and driven in a browser; documented means rated from documentation and printed as an upper bound; not driven means the system is landscape only and carries no score.

Nextcloud ecosystem

system	class	180	open core	what was found
OpenCase 1.1.0 (Lamotech)	driven	58 (62 of 206)	yes: a separate non-public enterprise edition holds AI, digital post, CPR and CVR	A Danish municipal case system on Nextcloud, and the only case system on dossiq's host. Strong on documents (13 of 23) and parties (7 of 13); cannot list overdue cases.
Nextcloud Deck 1.18.4	driven	37	no, and not a shape: nothing is withheld	Seven document rows through Files, versions, expiring shares, lock, trash, preview and file manager. No field, number, party, term or result on a card.
Nextcloud Tasks, Nextcloud Forms	not driven			CalDAV task items and an intake form builder. No case lifecycle, roles or decisions. Unmeasured.

Dutch government (zaakgericht werken)

Round 2 drove four Dutch systems against the 206-row matrix (_round2/compare/M1-functionality.md); round 3 read Dimpact ZAC against the same rows. The 180-row figures are from _round4/compare/twenty-six-system-tally.md.

system	class	180	206 (yes / partial / no)	open core	what was found
xxllnc Zaken (Zaaksysteem)	driven	125	136 / 40 / 30	not established	The top of the corpus. Documents 18 of 23, parties 11 of 13, search 10 of 12, intake 9 of 13. Three UI generations in one product; fifteen clicks to create a case.
GZAC / Valtimo 13.4.1	driven	82	86 / 55 / 65	partly: two closed-published npm packages	Configuration 18 of 24 and tasks 14 of 19 on a BPMN engine (Operaton). An Admin group with 13 children; twelve clicks to create a case; cannot list overdue cases.
dossiq	driven	71	84 / 87 / 35	no: 0 entitlement hits	Decisions 6 of 7 and deadlines 8 of 10 lead every column; documents 7 of 23 and search 4 of 12 do not. Four clicks to create a case.
OpenCase 1.1.0	driven	58	62 / 46 / 98	yes, see above	See the Nextcloud table.
Dimpact ZAC 1.0.316	read, not driven		69 / 61 / 76	not established	A case component over Open Zaak. It owns no data: the case, its documents and its retention live in Open Zaak, so 26 of its 76 misses cite an external component and the column reads low for a structural reason.
OpenZaak, Rx.Mission, Decos JOIN, Mozard, PinkRoccade iZaaksuite, Atabix, Visma Circle	not driven			Round 1 scouting material exists in the corpus per vendor. OpenZaak is the API component ZAC fronts; the others are commercial and were never installed.

What round 2 concluded in words (_round2/compare/M1-functionality.md, "Where all three rivals have it and we do not"): the set of rows every Dutch rival passes and dossiq fails was seven at the reading and reduces to at most two, probably one, once stale cells are corrected: a one-click claim on a case (row 2.4), which all three give a handler and dossiq still makes them get by editing a field. The re-read confirms 2.4 as a gap and opens case-claim-action.

Where dossiq is ahead of all three, measured in the round 2 files (data.strengths in the ledger): a deadline countdown and an overdue list on every case, where OpenCase and GZAC cannot list overdue cases at all; configuration in the settings gear rather than the menu; one index-and-detail pattern for every collection; case creation in four clicks against fifteen and twelve; a cross-type case index with a folder sidebar; and leaf tabs from other apps rendered inside the case.

Issue and ticket systems, the third family

Set by Ruben on 2026-09-12: issue trackers, help desks and boards are a third competitor family, closer to dossiq in daily use than a BPM engine. Twenty-two were installed and driven and four rated from documents (_round4/compare/README.md). The open-core column names the shape from the fourteen the round found; the result page explains each.

system	family	licence	class	180	open core
OTOBO 11.0.17	ticket	GPL-3.0	driven	78	no: 45 free packages, none priced; four core capabilities ship switched off
Odoo 19.0 Community	project management	LGPL-3.0	driven	78	yes, by absence with a label: 21 to_buy records and 45 upgrade badges for a private Enterprise tree
Znuny 7.3.6	ticket	AGPL-3.0 and GPL	driven	73	no: 37 vendor packages, none priced
Frappe Helpdesk 1.30.1	ticket	AGPL-3.0	driven	72	no: AGPL across both repositories, zero hits for a key or a paywall; a thin app on a thick framework
Request Tracker 5.0.10	ticket	GPL-2.0	driven	65	no: nothing withheld, the extensions on CPAN under the same licence, the vendor selling hours and hosting
Tuleap CE 17.5	ALM suite	GPL-2.0	driven	65	yes, the thirteenth shape: the open edition verifies an Ed25519 licence it can never hold, and nineteen Enterprise plugins are absent. The source stopped being public on 2026-09-13
Huly v0.7.426	issue and workspace	EPL-2.0	driven	60	no gate at all, and the fourteenth shape: the vendor's own self-host compose runs 1 of 22 services and 6 of 14 pods, with no statement of what is missing
iTop 3.2.3	ITSM and CMDB	AGPL-3.0	driven	58	yes, as a catalogue: 33 closed extensions on the store, none in the tree
GLPI 11.0.8	ITSM help desk	GPL-3.0	driven	56	no
osTicket 1.18.4	ticket	GPL-2.0	driven	55	no; eight free capabilities in a separate, stale repository
Zammad 7.1.3	help desk	AGPL-3.0	driven	53	no
OpenProject 16.6.10	issue and project	GPL-3.0	driven	46	yes: 32 features gated at runtime, four degrading silently
Redmine 7.0.1	issue	GPL-2.0	driven	43	no; plugins and a proprietary fork sold beside it
Nextcloud Deck 1.18.4	kanban	AGPL-3.0	driven	37	no, not a shape
Kanboard 1.2.54	kanban	MIT	driven	37	no: 163 third-party plugins, none priced in the directory
GitLab CE 19.3.2	forge issues	MIT	driven	36	yes, by subtraction: the paid code removed at build time, 1,616 empty seams
Vikunja 2.6.0	task	AGPL-3.0	driven	35	yes, a gate that hides: three paid features in the AGPL tree answering 404 by design
Taiga 6.10.2	agile project management	MPL-2.0	driven	32	no, and not a shape: zero hits, the vendor sells hosting of this code. Telemetry is on by default and sends the instance's own URL nightly
Forgejo 16.0.4	forge issues	GPL-3.0	driven	23	no; a closed derivative is unavailable by design
Gitea 1.27.3	forge issues	MIT	driven	23	no gate anywhere, and the twelfth shape: the steward sells Gitea Enterprise and Gitea Cloud, with no trace of either in the tree
Plane Community 1.4.2	issue	AGPL-3.0	driven	22	yes: the paid features are absent, only the seams remain
FreeScout 1.8.240	ticket	AGPL-3.0	driven	22	yes: 72 of 75 modules priced, the paywall through the free half
Easy Redmine 16.0	issue and project	GPL-2.0 core, ESCLv2.0 layer	documented	86, upper bound	yes, the eleventh shape: a source-available proprietary layer on a GPL core, sold as open source; 22 cells name the Platform plan and 9 an add-on
Jira Service Management Cloud	ITSM	proprietary	documented	83, upper bound	yes, by plan: a plan table, 16 cells Premium, 8 Enterprise
YouTrack 2026.2	issue	proprietary	documented	78, upper bound	no: nothing withheld above ten users and three agents
Jira Software Data Center 11.3	issue	proprietary	documented	64, upper bound	no above the user tier; the service half is a second licence, and sales to new customers ended on 2026-03-30

Gitea and Forgejo are one product for every question in the matrix: 23 yes and 48 partial each, and 0 of 206 rows differing. Batch 12 closed the undriven set the candidate table had carried since round 3.

Three things the family says as a whole. A product built around a team's own work has no party, no document record, no decision and no term engine, which is 53 rows between four sections; the help desks do better than the boards because a help desk is built around somebody outside the organisation. Every non-Dutch column scored 0 of 7 on decisions until batch 12, and Tuleap and Huly score 1 each, both on the same row: an outcome list configured per type. Nobody outside the Dutch family scores a besluit, a decision letter, a Woo assessment or an objection surface. And copyleft proves nothing about what you can deploy: most of these trees are GPL, LGPL or AGPL, and among them sits every open-core shape a grep has found.

BPM engines and case management platforms

None of these was driven. They stay on the page as landscape because they are what a tender names, and they carry no score.

system	positioning	why it is not a column
Camunda 8	process orchestration, BPMN and DMN	A process engine, not a case system; the rows it would score are section 3 and 11. Corpus scouting under camunda/.
Operaton	the open-source fork of Camunda 7	The engine under GZAC, already measured through it.
Flowable	BPM with CMMN 1.1	Not installed. Corpus scouting under flowable/.
Bonita, jBPM, ProcessMaker	low-code BPM	Not installed.
Appian, Pega	commercial low-code platforms	Closed, no trial without a sales process.
ArkCase, CaseFabric, Alfresco	case and content management	ArkCase was named for the first time in round 4 and is the next candidate outside the three families; Alfresco is archived.

Enterprise SaaS

Cloud only. ServiceNow and the ITSM products in the last row are docs only in the ledger, included for landscape and never as evidence; Monday.com, Power Automate and Kissflow are not in the ledger and stay here only because a tender names them.

system	positioning	why not, for a municipality
ServiceNow	ITSM market leader	SaaS only, no self-hosting, no Dutch statutory rows.
Monday.com	work management	SaaS only, no case model.
Microsoft Power Automate	low-code flows on M365	M365 dependency; data sovereignty is the buyer's question, not a product row.
Kissflow	workflow builder	SaaS only.
Zendesk, Freshservice, TOPdesk, HaloITSM, InvGate, TeamDynamix, ALVAO	ITSM and help desk	SaaS or closed; on the ledger's candidate list, unrated.

2. Feature matrix

The tiering below (MVP, V1, Enterprise) was written before the driving and is kept as the product's own map of its scope. It is not a comparison. The build order that the comparison produced is the gap register's five to build first and the OpenSpec umbrella.

Case management

Feature	Tier	Justification
Case CRUD with lifecycle	MVP	Core entity
Case list with search, sort, filters	MVP	Navigation
Case detail view with timeline	MVP	Critical UX pattern
Status timeline visualization on case detail	MVP	Visual progress showing passed/current/future statuses
Case deadline countdown (days remaining / days overdue)	MVP	At-a-glance urgency indicator
Quick status change from case list view	MVP	Common pattern: change status without opening detail
Case type system (configurable)	V1	Flexible case definitions
Sub-cases (parent/child hierarchy)	V1	Complex case structures
Document completion checklist (case detail)	V1	Shows which required documents are present vs missing
Property completion indicator	V1	Percentage of required custom fields filled
Days in current status indicator	V1	Shows how long a case has been in current phase
Case templates	V1	Standardized case creation
Case cloning	V1	Efficiency for similar cases
Configurable status workflows per type	Enterprise	Organization-specific lifecycles
CMMN runtime (sentries, entry/exit criteria)	Enterprise	Advanced case automation
Bulk case operations	Enterprise	Scale operations

Task management

Feature	Tier	Justification
Task CRUD linked to cases	MVP	Core work tracking
Task list with status filters	MVP	Workflow overview
Task assignment to users	MVP	Workload distribution
Task due dates and priorities	MVP	Time management
Task checklist (sub-items)	V1	Detailed work breakdown
Task dependencies (blocked by)	V1	Sequencing work
Kanban board view for tasks	V1	Visual task management
Task templates per case type	V1	Standardized workflows
Automated task creation on status change	Enterprise	Workflow automation
Workload dashboard (tasks per user)	Enterprise	Management visibility

Status and lifecycle

Feature	Tier	Justification
Status tracking (current phase)	MVP	Core lifecycle
Status history (audit trail)	MVP	Accountability
Configurable status types	V1	Organization-specific phases
Status change notifications	V1	Immediate feedback
Status-based access control	Enterprise	Phase-dependent permissions
SLA tracking (time in status)	Enterprise	Service quality

Roles and participants

Feature	Tier	Justification
Assign handler to case	MVP	Basic assignment
Role types (initiator, handler, advisor)	MVP	CMMN role model
Multiple participants per case	V1	Team collaboration
Role-based permissions per case	V1	Access control
Automatic role assignment rules	Enterprise	Scale operations
External participant support	Enterprise	Cross-organization cases

Results and decisions

Feature	Tier	Justification
Case result recording	MVP	Case closure
Decision CRUD linked to cases	V1	Formal decision tracking
Decision with effective/expiry dates	V1	Legal validity periods
Result types (configurable)	V1	Classification
Decision templates	Enterprise	Standardized decisions
DMN decision tables	Enterprise	Automated decision logic

Case type system

Feature	Tier	Justification
Case type CRUD (admin)	MVP	Core behavioral configuration
Case type controls allowed statuses	MVP	Status lifecycle per type
Case type controls processing deadline	MVP	Automatic deadline calculation
Case type draft/published lifecycle	MVP	Safe configuration changes
Case type validity periods (validFrom/validUntil)	MVP	Version management
Case type controls allowed roles	V1	Role restriction per type
Case type controls result types (with archival rules)	V1	Outcome classification
Case type custom property definitions	V1	Organization-specific fields
Case type required documents per status	V1	Compliance controls
Case type decision type definitions	V1	Decision classification
Case type confidentiality defaults	V1	Security defaults
Case type suspension/extension rules	V1	Deadline management
Case type sub-case type restrictions	Enterprise	Hierarchical control
Case type versioning chains	Enterprise	Auditable type evolution
Case type import/export	Enterprise	Share types across instances

My work (werkvoorraad)

Feature	Tier	Justification
Personal workload view (my cases, my tasks)	MVP	Productivity essential
Sort by priority and due date/deadline	MVP	Task prioritization
Filter by entity type (cases, tasks)	MVP	Focused views
Overdue item highlighting	MVP	Proactive management
Cross-app workload (include Pipelinq leads/requests)	V1	Unified work queue
Workload analytics (items per user)	Enterprise	Management visibility

Admin settings

Feature	Tier	Justification
Nextcloud admin settings page	MVP	App configuration
Case type management UI	MVP	Core configuration
Status type management per case type	MVP	Lifecycle configuration
Default case type selection	MVP	Out-of-box experience
Result type management per case type	V1	Outcome configuration
Role type management per case type	V1	Role configuration
Property definition management	V1	Custom field configuration
Document type management	V1	Document requirement configuration
Decision type management	V1	Decision configuration
Confidentiality level visibility	Enterprise	Security customization

Communication and collaboration

Feature	Tier	Justification
Internal notes on cases (ICommentsManager)	MVP	Collaboration basics
Shared case views (multi-user access)	MVP	Team case management
Talk integration (per-case chat, IBroker)	V1	Real-time discussion
Calendar integration (deadlines, IManager)	V1	Deadline visibility
Activity stream (case events, IManager)	V1	Unified timeline
Notifications (assignment, status, deadline)	V1	Immediate feedback
User mentions in notes	V1	Team collaboration
Email notifications on case updates	V1	External communication
Email templates per case type	Enterprise	Standardized correspondence

Document management

Feature	Tier	Justification
File attachments on cases (IRootFolder)	V1	Document management
Shared folder per case (Files)	V1	Case dossier
Document categorization	V1	Classification
Document versioning (via Nextcloud)	V1	Audit trail
Document templates per case type	Enterprise	Standardized documents
Digital signature integration	Enterprise	Legal validity

Reporting and analytics

Feature	Tier	Justification
Dashboard with case counts and status overview	MVP	At-a-glance visibility
Case status distribution chart	MVP	Visual overview
List/table export (CSV)	V1	Data portability
KPI dashboard (avg processing time, open cases)	V1	Management visibility
Case type breakdown chart	V1	Distribution of open cases by type
Average processing time per case type	V1	Performance metric per type
Overdue case alerts	V1	Proactive management
SLA compliance meter (% cases meeting deadline)	Enterprise	Service quality tracking
Case type performance comparison	Enterprise	Compare avg time, completion rates
Handler workload heatmap	Enterprise	Visualize case distribution across handlers
Custom report builder	Enterprise	Flexible analytics
Trend analysis (case volume over time)	Enterprise	Strategic planning

Security and compliance

Feature	Tier	Justification
RBAC via OpenRegister	MVP	Access control
Full audit trail (who changed what, when)	MVP	Accountability
WCAG AA compliance	MVP	Government requirement
Confidentiality levels on cases	V1	Sensitive case handling
GDPR data export (right of access)	V1	EU compliance
GDPR data deletion (right to erasure)	V1	EU compliance
NL Design System theming	V1	Government visual compliance
Data retention policies	Enterprise	Compliance automation
Archival management (archiefwet)	Enterprise	Dutch archival law
Field-level access control	Enterprise	Sensitive data protection

Integration

Feature	Tier	Justification
Pipelinq bridge (request-to-case)	V1	CRM-to-case workflow
ZGW Zaken API mapping	V1	Dutch gov interop
ZGW Besluiten API mapping	V1	Dutch decision interop
ZGW Catalogi API mapping	V1	Dutch type catalog interop
External REST API	V1	OpenRegister provides this
Nextcloud Flows automation	Enterprise	Low-code triggers
Webhook support	Enterprise	External integration
Federated case sharing	Enterprise	Cross-organization cases

Customization

Feature	Tier	Justification
Configurable list columns	V1	UI flexibility
Custom fields per case type (OpenRegister schema)	V1	Organization-specific needs
Saved views/filters	V1	User productivity
Custom dashboards	Enterprise	Personalized views
Public intake form (citizen-facing)	Enterprise	External case submission
Workflow designer (visual)	Enterprise	Admin-configured automation

3. Gap analysis

Every line here names a row or a file. The full per-area table is on the result page.

What competitors do well, measured

• xxllnc Zaken tops every area a Dutch buyer asks about first: documents 18 of 23, parties 11 of 13, search 10 of 12, intake 9 of 13.
• GZAC wins configuration, 18 of 24, and tasks, 14 of 19, on its BPMN engine.
• OTOBO and Znuny ship a process engine, an ACL engine, custom fields, nine working calendars, a generic interface and a customer portal, and score 8 of 12 on search and 7 of 10 on reporting. None of their vendor packages is priced.
• Odoo reaches 78 without a case number, a term engine or a document model, from the platform under its project module: one chatter, one automation engine, one record-rule layer, one form builder and typed properties per project.
• OpenProject has the best deadline engine in the corpus: a working-day calculator that returned a non-working day 0 times in 1,675 computations, and the only recompute of existing deadlines when the calendar changes, with the reason written to the history.
• Redmine still wins field permissions by role and case state outright, and recomputes a dependent's dates when a predecessor slips.
• Deck passes seven document rows because its attachment is a file in Files.

What they lack, measured

gap	evidence
Decisions	1 of 7 at best in every non-Dutch column, twenty-two driven and four documented, and 0 in twenty-four of the twenty-six. The one row Tuleap and Huly pass is an outcome list per type. The nearest decision object anywhere is OpenProject's MeetingOutcome with a decision kind and no approver, quorum, number, effective date or publication.
Dutch statutory rows	26 rows, twenty-six non-Dutch systems, 676 cells, zero yes. Every catalogue searched by name: 0 apps for ZGW, and none of the seven names on Easy8's 1,434 pages.
Documents	The weakest area of the whole non-Dutch corpus, with one exception. Znuny and GitLab share two yes answers over 46 document rows; Kanboard and Vikunja the same; Frappe Helpdesk, Request Tracker, Gitea and Taiga score one each of 23. Huly scores 8 and Tuleap 7, both from a document manager of their own.
Easter	Nothing in twenty-six non-Dutch columns computes it. Frappe Helpdesk and Request Tracker agreed to the minute on a Dutch year and both landed a 2027 term on Tweede Paasdag. dossiq computes it, in lib/Service/WorkingDayCalculator.php.
The edition you can deploy	Pending row 11.27. Fourteen open-core shapes across the corpus; dossiq passes because there is no paid half.
Overdue lists	OpenCase and GZAC cannot list overdue cases at all.

Where dossiq is behind, measured

row	what	who passes
13.18	Watchers on a case, distinct from the assignee	Eight of eight non-Dutch systems in the register's reading; dossiq the only no in the ledger.
6.15	Internal versus public per timeline entry	Seven of eight; the citizen portal cannot show a timeline until every entry says which side of the counter it is on.
8.11, 8.12, 8.17	An administered working calendar, the Atw roll, recompute on change	30.4% of stored terms land on a non-working day.
2.4	One-click claim on a case	All three Dutch rivals.
Q10.14	A refused write answers with a status	47 catch (\Throwable) sites in 37 files under lib/Service/ return null or [].
13.17	Substituted work reaches My work	fetchSubstitutedWork() has no call site.
13.23	A right on a parent case applies to its sub-cases	Vikunja, measured three levels down; CaseAccessGuard.php never reads parentCase.
6.20	Outbound webhooks are signed	Vikunja; dossiq verifies inbound signatures and signs nothing outbound.
3.22	A stage holds a capacity and refuses work past it	Vikunja with a 412; no Dutch system in the corpus. Taiga stores a WIP limit and enforces it only in a CSS class.
8.22	Every write path to a date field agrees, and one date is shown	Taiga, whose due_date is a date and not a timestamp. Nine dossiq controllers can set a case date and the only normaliser is private to one caller.
8.23	The deadline engine reads the calendar the organisation administers	Nobody yet. dossiq is partial: 37 files under lib/ do date arithmetic and five call WorkingDayCalculator, three of the rest being term paths by name.
sections 4, 9, 3, 11	Documents 7 of 23, search 4 of 12, tasks 6 of 19, configuration 9 of 24	xxllnc, GZAC, OTOBO, Odoo.

The gap register puts these and the rest into 161 gaps with one owner each, 34 on dossiq and 69 on openregister. 152 of them name the OpenSpec change that carries them, across 85 changes in nine repositories, and the nine that do not each say why: two deliberate no's on Microsoft integration, two more on openregister, four platform facts that belong to Nextcloud, and one proposal waiting for a driven yes. The result page has the counts by owner, and the umbrella the dossiq changes, 33 at first and five more.

Twelve pull requests are merged so far: dossiq #2719, #2721, #2723, #2729, #2732, #2744, #2746 and #2748; openregister #3707, #3711 and #3714; portaliq #551. Thirteen more lanes are in flight and none is merged.

Nextcloud-native advantages, measured and unmeasured

capability	standing
Leaf tabs from other apps inside the case page (mail, appointments, decisions, hours)	Measured in round 2: no competitor composes another product into the case page.
Document capabilities through Files (versions, expiring shares, lock, trash, preview, file manager)	Measured through Deck: six rows dossiq gets on the same host; row 4.23 says which already follow.
Case creation in four clicks	Measured: fifteen in xxllnc Zaken, twelve in GZAC.
The calendar as an OpenRegister schema, with Easter computed	Measured against twenty-six non-Dutch columns. Three of dossiq's own term paths do not call it, which is proposed row 8.23.
Federated cross-organisation cases	Design claim, not a matrix row. Unmeasured.
Talk room per case, air-gapped deployment, data reuse across apps on OpenRegister	Design claims. Unmeasured.

4. Strategic positioning

Positioning statement

dossiq is case management that lives where your team already works. Built into Nextcloud, it turns the workspace you have into a case system, with files, calendar, chat and activity already connected.

Differentiation

1. The law, measured. 13 statutory yes answers, 6 of 7 decision rows and 8 of 10 deadline rows that no help desk, board or forge scores. That is the half of the matrix a Dutch buyer cannot do without, and the half the comparable score leaves out on purpose.
2. Platform leverage. Documents, tabs from other apps, and the file manager come from the host; Deck proved the document rows do, and dossiq gets them for the same price.
3. Nothing withheld. No paid edition, no key, no gate: pending row 11.27 passes on a grep with zero hits, which two of the three systems above dossiq outside the Dutch family cannot say without a footnote.

Target segments

segment	why dossiq	what they would otherwise use, measured where it was
Small municipalities	Simple, affordable, NL-compliant	Spreadsheets and shared drives, or xxllnc Zaken at 125 of 180
Government teams	ZGW-ready, sovereign, NL Design	Open Zaak with ZAC, which owns no data of its own
SMB operations	Lightweight, on the workspace they have	Odoo at 78, OTOBO or Znuny at 78 and 73, Frappe Helpdesk at 72
NGOs and nonprofits	Free, self-hosted, collaboration first	Kanboard or Vikunja at 37 and 35

Risks, measured

risk	evidence	mitigation
Statutory terms land on non-working days	30.4% of stored terms, _round4/compare/deadline-engines.md; the Atw roll is absent	First of the five to build: the administered working calendar with the roll and recompute, terms-on-the-engine-calendar and openregister working-calendar-admin
Non-Dutch products outscore dossiq on the comparable half	OTOBO 78, Odoo 78, Znuny 73 and Frappe Helpdesk 72 against 71; Easy Redmine 86 and JSM 83 as documented ceilings	The gap register: 161 gaps, 103 of them size S, 152 carried by a named OpenSpec change
Rows dossiq alone fails	13.18 watchers, 6.15 internal versus public	Second and third of the five to build
Refusals that look like absence	47 catch-and-return-null sites	refusals-carry-a-status, fourth of the five
Schemas registered ahead of the feature	27 schemas with no surface anywhere on the tree	no-schema-without-a-surface, a structural test
OpenRegister dependency	69 of 161 gaps, and 280 of the 636 discovery candidates, are owned by openregister, every one of them now carried by a change	The openregister umbrella carries them; dossiq keeps a half on each
Documents are the largest area gap against the Dutch rivals, and now against one non-Dutch column	7 of 23 against xxllnc's 18, OpenCase's 13 and Huly's 8	documents-on-the-case and the Files rows Deck already passes on the same host

5. Recommended feature set

The MVP, V1 and Enterprise lists below are the product's own scope map, written before the driving and kept for continuity. For what to build next, read the five to build first.

MVP (27 features)

Replace spreadsheets and informal case tracking for small teams. Case types control behavior from day one.

Case management

1. Case CRUD with lifecycle
2. Case list with search, sort, filters
3. Case detail view with timeline
4. Status timeline visualization on case detail
5. Case deadline countdown (days remaining / overdue)
6. Quick status change from case list view
7. Case result recording

Case type system 8. Case type CRUD (admin) 9. Case type controls allowed statuses (ordered) 10. Case type controls processing deadline (auto-calculated) 11. Case type draft/published lifecycle 12. Case type validity periods

Task management 13. Task CRUD linked to cases 14. Task list with status filters 15. Task assignment to users 16. Task due dates and priorities

Roles and status 17. Case handler assignment (initiator, handler roles) 18. Status tracking with history

My work and dashboard 19. My Work view (personal workload: my cases, my tasks) 20. Overdue item highlighting 21. Dashboard with counts and status distribution

Admin settings 22. Nextcloud admin settings page 23. Case type management UI 24. Status type management per case type 25. Default case type selection

Platform 26. RBAC via OpenRegister 27. Full audit trail, WCAG AA, English/Dutch localization

V1 (34 additional features)

Compete with Open Zaak plus a frontend for government teams.

Case type extensions 28. Case type controls allowed roles 29. Case type controls result types (with archival rules) 30. Case type custom property definitions 31. Case type required documents per status 32. Case type decision type definitions 33. Case type confidentiality defaults 34. Case type suspension/extension rules

Case management 35. Sub-cases (parent/child) 36. Document completion checklist (required vs present) 37. Property completion indicator (% required fields filled) 38. Days in current status indicator 39. Case templates 40. Confidentiality levels on cases

Task management 41. Task checklist and dependencies 42. Kanban board for tasks 43. Task templates per case type

Decisions 44. Decision CRUD with effective/expiry dates

Admin settings 45. Result type management per case type 46. Role type management per case type 47. Property/document/decision type management

Reporting 48. Case type breakdown chart (dashboard) 49. Average processing time per case type

Collaboration 50. Talk integration (per-case chat) 51. Calendar integration (deadlines in calendar) 52. Activity stream publishing 53. Status change notifications 54. File attachments and shared folders

Integration 55. Pipelinq bridge (request-to-case) 56. ZGW API mapping (Zaken, Besluiten, Catalogi) 57. Cross-app My Work (include Pipelinq leads/requests)

Compliance and UX 58. GDPR export + deletion 59. NL Design System theming 60. Saved views/filters 61. Configurable list columns

Enterprise (21 additional features)

Large municipalities, multi-organization, and compliance-heavy deployments.

62. Federated case sharing
63. Case type sub-case type restrictions
64. Case type versioning chains
65. Case type import/export
66. CMMN runtime (sentries, criteria)
67. Nextcloud Flows automation
68. Automated task creation on status change
69. SLA compliance meter (% cases meeting deadline)
70. Case type performance comparison
71. Handler workload heatmap
72. Workload analytics (items per user)
73. DMN decision tables
74. Archival management (archiefwet)
75. Data retention policies
76. Field-level access control
77. Webhook support
78. Public intake form
79. Document templates
80. Bulk case operations
81. Workflow designer (visual)
82. Custom report builder