CIRPASS for Fashion: What the Textile DPP Is Actually Building

There has been a lot of noise about the Digital Product Passport. Less noise about what is already done. CIRPASS is one of the EU-funded projects shaping the technical backbone for product passports, and textiles sit right in the work.

This isn’t theory. CIRPASS already outlines what textile DPP data looks like, how it is structured, and how information moves through the supply chain - from fibre to recycling. The work makes something very clear: data interoperability is becoming a basic industry function, not an innovation add-on.

The system is being built on existing textile rules, starting with the EU Textile Labelling Regulation 1007/2011, because material composition is a core DPP field. CIRPASS does not stop at the consumer-visible label. It extends fibre data into machine-readable fields, including fibre names, percentages, characteristics, and traceability attributes like source or recycled content.

Automated sorting trials in CIRPASS prototypes used this fibre data directly, matching garment records to real recycling lines. The file format matters here, not photos, not PDFs, linked, structured identifiers.

The concept is simple: a recycler needs to know what the textile is made of, and the information has to be trustworthy and queryable. CIRPASS lists fibre mix and material components for each garment part as core fields.

What circular data actually looks like

CIRPASS includes recyclability indicators in the DPP model. The files reference stakeholder input calling for a “recyclability scoring label” tied to recycled cotton, wool, rubber or viscose.

Current ecolabels do not cover recycling performance well enough; there is “no score for recycled cotton” in existing schemes. CIRPASS instead points to the Product Circularity Data Sheet (ISO 59040) as a structure for this information - boolean and numeric statements that confirm attributes without exposing trade secrets.

In the prototypes, recyclers used these data points to raise reuse and recycling volumes, based on access to composition and recyclability fields. One line in the findings says it simply: “Access to DPP data on the composition, quality and recyclability of textile products should make it possible to increase the volume of reusable and recyclable textiles sold on the European market.”

The takeaway: circularity is not a slogan. It is data fields, permissions, and machine logic.

How data travels in this system

CIRPASS uses a graph-based data model - RDF, OWL, URIs - to ensure each product and material type has a unique identifier and links to other data. That means a cotton shirt doesn't just “say cotton.” It references cotton as a URI, and that URI can link to standards, fibre types, and test definitions.

The structure follows Tim Berners-Lee’s Linked Data principles: use URIs, make them dereferenceable, return machine-readable RDF, and link to other URIs.

This solves a practical supply-chain problem: different systems can write different formats, yet still speak to each other at the data layer.

The DPP aligns with Ecodesign rules requiring open, interoperable formats, machine readability, and no vendor lock-in. Storage remains decentralised - each economic actor maintains its own data while connecting through shared identifiers and schemas.

Two architecture paths exist and both are valid: an HTTP URI system like GS1 Digital Link, or decentralised identifiers (DIDs) anchored on a ledger. The data model stays the same. What changes is the trust and resolution mechanism.

Where does this head go next

CIRPASS-2 moves from architecture to deployment, focusing on a “DPP Stakeholder Exchange Forum” - a shared digital space for pilots, tools, and SME support. The Global Textile Scheme contributes classification work to help define recyclability semantics.

CIRPASS calls this “operationalising” the DPP foundation: taking the schema, permissions system, and data fields and making them usable for brands and recyclers.

Why this matters for smaller fashion players

This project is setting the rules of the data game before the rules hit product-level enforcement. Material composition, recyclability scoring, and standardised identifiers are not future concepts here. They are fields and URIs that already exist inside technical files.

When recycling machines read product data, and procurement guidance calls for fibre origin and recycled content tracking, you see where the industry is going.

Compliance becomes the minimum. Structured data becomes a capability.

And the brands that treat data as product infrastructure, not admin, will reach circular markets faster than those who wait for templates later.