diff --git a/packages/scenario/src/error/UnclearApplicabilityError.ts b/packages/scenario/src/error/UnclearApplicabilityError.ts
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..0c8750e3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/packages/scenario/src/error/UnclearApplicabilityError.ts
@@ -0,0 +1,7 @@
+export class UnclearApplicabilityError extends Error {
+	constructor(subject: string) {
+		super(
+			`It is not yet clear if/how ${subject} functionality will be applicable in the web forms project`
+		);
+	}
+}
diff --git a/packages/scenario/src/jr/Scenario.ts b/packages/scenario/src/jr/Scenario.ts
index 03afbc86..7157a3e4 100644
--- a/packages/scenario/src/jr/Scenario.ts
+++ b/packages/scenario/src/jr/Scenario.ts
@@ -1,5 +1,5 @@
 import type { XFormsElement } from '@odk-web-forms/common/test/fixtures/xform-dsl/XFormsElement.ts';
-import type { RootNode } from '@odk-web-forms/xforms-engine';
+import type { AnyNode, RootNode } from '@odk-web-forms/xforms-engine';
 import type { Accessor, Setter } from 'solid-js';
 import { createMemo, createSignal, runWithOwner } from 'solid-js';
 import { afterEach, expect } from 'vitest';
@@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ import { answerOf } from '../client/answerOf.ts';
 import type { TestFormResource } from '../client/init.ts';
 import { initializeTestForm } from '../client/init.ts';
 import { getClosestRepeatRange } from '../client/traversal.ts';
+import { UnclearApplicabilityError } from '../error/UnclearApplicabilityError.ts';
 import { PositionalEvent } from './event/PositionalEvent.ts';
 import { RepeatInstanceEvent } from './event/RepeatInstanceEvent.ts';
 import {
@@ -16,6 +17,7 @@ import {
 	type NonTerminalPositionalEvent,
 	type PositionalEvents,
 } from './event/getPositionalEvents.ts';
+import { TreeReference } from './instance/TreeReference.ts';
 import type { PathResource } from './resource/PathResource.ts';
 import { SelectChoiceList } from './select/SelectChoiceList.ts';
 
@@ -291,4 +293,26 @@ export class Scenario {
 
 		this.instanceRoot.setLanguage(language);
 	}
+
+	refAtIndex(): TreeReference {
+		const event = this.getSelectedPositionalEvent();
+
+		let treeReferenceNode: AnyNode;
+
+		if (event.eventType === 'END_OF_FORM') {
+			treeReferenceNode = this.instanceRoot;
+		} else {
+			treeReferenceNode = event.node;
+		}
+
+		return new TreeReference(treeReferenceNode);
+	}
+
+	/**
+	 * @todo it is not clear if/how we'll use similar logic in web forms. It
+	 * seems most likely to be applicable to offline capabilities.
+	 */
+	serializeAndDeserializeForm(): Promise<Scenario> {
+		return Promise.reject(new UnclearApplicabilityError('serialization/deserialization'));
+	}
 }
diff --git a/packages/scenario/src/jr/instance/TreeReference.ts b/packages/scenario/src/jr/instance/TreeReference.ts
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..a58c2ade
--- /dev/null
+++ b/packages/scenario/src/jr/instance/TreeReference.ts
@@ -0,0 +1,21 @@
+import type { AnyNode } from '@odk-web-forms/xforms-engine';
+
+/**
+ * Wraps a node (as in `@odk-web-forms/xforms-engine` semantic terms) to provide
+ * interface compatibility with JavaRosa's `TreeReference`, as minimally as
+ * possible to satisfy ported test logic/assertions.
+ */
+export class TreeReference {
+	constructor(readonly node: AnyNode) {}
+
+	/**
+	 * @todo Currently the engine doesn't provide a representation of secondary
+	 * instances **at all**. This seems "correct" for the current engine/client
+	 * responsibility boundaries, but that may change if/as we expand the
+	 * client concept into other areas of functionality beyond the primary form-
+	 * filling UI use cases.
+	 */
+	getInstanceName(): string | null {
+		return null;
+	}
+}
diff --git a/packages/scenario/src/value/ExpectedNullValue.ts b/packages/scenario/src/value/ExpectedNullValue.ts
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..1dcb48f9
--- /dev/null
+++ b/packages/scenario/src/value/ExpectedNullValue.ts
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+/**
+ * @todo Before bailing on the port of `FormDefSerializationTest.java`, it
+ * seemed quite likely there should be a `ComparableValue` abstraction below
+ * `ComparableAnswer`: `null` is almost certainly not an "answer", but we might
+ * find that there is a more general sense of comparable **and castable**
+ * assertion values, of which "answer" may be a more specific case.
+ */
+export class ExpectedNullValue {
+	constructor() {
+		throw new Error('TODO: see `ExpectedNullValue` JSDoc');
+	}
+}
+
+export const nullValue = () => null;
diff --git a/packages/scenario/test/serialization.test.ts b/packages/scenario/test/serialization.test.ts
new file mode 100644
index 00000000..a11c379f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/packages/scenario/test/serialization.test.ts
@@ -0,0 +1,76 @@
+import {
+	bind,
+	body,
+	head,
+	html,
+	input,
+	mainInstance,
+	model,
+	t,
+	title,
+} from '@odk-web-forms/common/test/fixtures/xform-dsl/index.ts';
+import { describe, expect, it } from 'vitest';
+import { Scenario } from '../src/jr/Scenario.ts';
+import { nullValue } from '../src/value/ExpectedNullValue.ts';
+
+// Ported as of https://github.com/getodk/javarosa/commit/5ae68946c47419b83e7d28290132d846e457eea6
+describe('Serialization', () => {
+	/**
+	 * **PORTING NOTES**
+	 *
+	 * Discussing these tests in Slack, it was determined that they're not
+	 * currently applicable to the web forms project. The first test is ported
+	 * largely because it was already most of the way there by this point,
+	 * although much of the supporting logic for a more faithful port has been
+	 * omitted for now (with some breadcrumbs on thinking behind that supporting
+	 * logic left in for posterity in case it becomes applicable in the future).
+	 *
+	 * We reached the conclusion to defer porting the rest of these tests for now,
+	 * on the basis that the current serialization functionality under test is in
+	 * support of specific performance optimizations; that the tests exercise
+	 * implementation details not directly pertinent to web forms at this time;
+	 * that the performance optimizations in question are themselves not likely to
+	 * be pertinent to web forms, at least at this time.
+	 *
+	 * We also agreed that this note would serve as an explanation of the above,
+	 * as well as an opportunity to briefly mention that we may have other reasons
+	 * to support (de)serialization, and to test that support, likely around
+	 * offline functionality. As such, we may want to revisit these skipped
+	 * JavaRosa tests if they seem valuable for that effort when we get to it.
+	 */
+	describe.skip('FormDefSerializationTest.java', () => {
+		const getSimplestFormScenario = async (): Promise<Scenario> => {
+			return Scenario.init(
+				'Simplest',
+				html(
+					head(
+						title('Simplest'),
+						model(mainInstance(t('data id="simplest"', t('a'))), bind('/data/a').type('string'))
+					),
+					body(input('/data/a'))
+				)
+			);
+		};
+
+		describe('instance name', () => {
+			describe('for reference in main instance', () => {
+				it.skip('is always null', async () => {
+					const scenario = await getSimplestFormScenario();
+
+					scenario.next('/data/a');
+
+					expect(scenario.refAtIndex().getInstanceName()).toEqual(nullValue());
+
+					const deserialized = await scenario.serializeAndDeserializeForm();
+
+					deserialized.next('/data/a');
+
+					expect(deserialized.refAtIndex().getInstanceName()).toEqual(nullValue());
+				});
+
+				it.skip('instanceName_forFormDefEvaluationContext_isAlwaysNull');
+				it.skip('instanceName_forFormDefMainInstance_isAlwaysNull');
+			});
+		});
+	});
+});