<strong>Background:</strong> Event-based digital health data and information exchange are a complex sociotechnical challenge because they rely on the existence of stable, shared meanings for care process concepts such as mandate, responsibility, episode boundaries, and referral, across clinical, administrative, financing, and technical stakeholders. International Organization for Standardization 13940:2015 System of Concepts to Support Continuity of Care (ContSys) provides a conceptual framework for continuity-of-care processes, but national translations and contextualization, along with their governance implications, remain largely undocumented in the scholarly literature. <strong>Objective:</strong> This study aimed to document Estonia’s translation and contextualization of ContSys and to identify and interpret recurring patterns of conceptual discrepancy that are relevant to the durable governance of event meanings. <strong>Methods:</strong> We conducted a qualitative study of a national standards implementation project by using document and artifact analysis. Materials included the source standard, the translated manuscript, mapping notes and spreadsheets, review records, and public commentary inputs. We preserved ContSys concepts while documenting local counterparts through country-specific notes (including scope differences and contextual legal use) and synonymous terms. We summarized implementation outputs by concept domain and interpreted discrepancy patterns by using the Levels of Conceptual Interoperability Model and Blobel’s Generic Component Model as a cross-domain reference architecture lens. <strong>Results:</strong> The Estonian publication covers all ContSys concept domains and includes extensive contextualization outputs (46 country-specific notes and 82 synonyms), with the highest concentrations in time- and responsibility-related domains, indicating where semantic pressure is the greatest. Mapping and review discussions repeatedly revealed conflation of local legal or organizational terms with distinct ContSys concepts, especially where mandate and responsibility shift over time. A familiar referral artifact label (Estonian: <i>saatekiri</i>) was inconsistently interpreted as (1) a mandate transfer, (2) joint involvement while retaining the original mandate, or (3) episode initiation, demonstrating why event meanings cannot be safely encoded as event triggers in specifications without an explicit, versioned meaning decision. <strong>Conclusions:</strong> Translating and contextualizing a conceptual standard can support cross-domain semantic alignment by making mismatches explicit while preserving conceptual fidelity. However, durable event meanings require an explicit stewardship model—decision rights, resourcing, conflict resolution, and change control—to maintain coherence as they evolve. <strong>Trial Registration:</strong>
