A.14:14 - SoTA-Echoing
This edition’s collection-belonging rule follows the current constructional line: first identify what is being constructed and what gives it identity, then state the relation that actually obtains. It does not import a ready-made universal membership predicate.
| Source line | Useful contribution | Limit | A.14 decision and destination |
|---|---|---|---|
| Partridge et al., the constructional turn, and BORO C-FORS 2025 | Set, sum, tuple, and assembly constructors have different outputs, dependence, and identity conditions. | BORO’s extensional, 4D, and unrestricted-composition commitments are not FPF defaults. | Adapt. Solution item 5 and CC-MEM-1 distinguish a collection’s own belongs-to rule from a C.13 sum; CC-MEM-2/3 require a separate constructive-part claim rather than deriving or prohibiting it from belonging. |
| Florio and Linnebo, constructional ontology, and Borgo and Righetti, applied constructional ontology | Givens, constructors, inputs, and construction processes must be distinguished; set, sum, and ordered-pair constructions are not interchangeable. | The applied work is exploratory and does not supply FPF’s domain-facing identity, admission, use, or history rules. Its plural membership is not a world-side belongs-to predicate. | Adopt the explicit-choice obligation; reject predicate import. The decision table and Step 5 ask for the entity, collection, and its own beginning, ending, recurrence, and history conditions. |
| Kit Fine, Towards a Theory of Part | Composition comes before derived part claims, and different operations have different application, identity, presence, and character principles. | Fine’s broad use of part can also cover set elements or sequence places; that umbrella is too broad for a practitioner-facing FPF relation. | Adopt operational priority; narrow the public result. CC-MEM-2 blocks both the inference from belonging to parthood and the inference that parthood is impossible; CC-MEM-3 admits the second claim only after all six A.1 matters pass. |
| Kit Fine, The Identity of Social Groups | Structured groups can persist through changing manifestations, and the same participants need not identify the same group. | An identity-through-change rule does not make a register, corpus, product series, or Suite a structured whole. | Adopt the identity questions, not automatic embodiment. CC-MEM-1 requires the collection’s identity and belonging history; the A.1 gate remains separate. |
Aspect branch application
For AspectOf, the BORO and CCO rows above supply the constructor-sensitive question: which bearer, facet rule, dependent aspect, and identity conditions make this structural part? Fine’s composition-first pressure blocks a bare aspect label from deciding parthood. A.14 adapts that line in A.14:5.3, the decision procedure, and CC-ASP-1 through CC-ASP-4; C.13 slice remains an optional report, not the constructor of the aspect. The serious alternatives are routed rather than renamed: measured Characteristic (C.16/A.19), viewpoint or view (E.17), representation or projection (C.29 or its direct pattern), selected partition, and temporal restriction (PhaseOf/C.27.TA). The author must identify the actual relation before reusing the word aspect.
The resulting collection alternatives are deliberately distinct:
- Selected: an ordinary subject-specific belongs-to sentence plus the collection’s own rule.
- Rejected: one generic
MemberOf, because it collapses formal inclusion, classification, participation, collection belonging, and constructive parthood. - Rejected for present public use: one qualified generic collection-belonging predicate, because its qualifiers must recreate every subject rule.
- Retained as a separate possible claim: constructive parthood, but only when its direct relation obtains and all six
A.1matters pass.
A.14 supplies no immediate cross-domain query key for all belongs-to relations; use F.18 to name a narrower relation when repeated query, comparison, or declaration use justifies that extra vocabulary.
The rest of the catalogue retains its own governing source lines:
- Metrical mereology advances motivate PortionOf with explicit μ and Σ-laws, preventing the classic “stuff as components” fallacy.
- Temporal parts and identity through change motivate PhaseOf as transitive proper temporal parthood, with nesting and overlap allowed, partition-specific coverage and non-overlap, and escalation when identity criteria fail.
- Engineering product models, including the ISO 15926 family, pressure authors to keep functional classification, physical product breakdown, and stocks or consumables distinct; A.14 routes those claims to their direct relations instead of one part tree.
- Knowledge-episteme edition histories in contemporary MBSE and open-science practice motivate explicit endpoint identities and provenance-preserving composition. FPF uses the C.2.1 identity triple and independently obtaining
EpistemeEditionRelationfor distinct editions; A.14 retainsPhaseOfonly for a proper temporal restriction of one unchanged episteme.
The catalogue keeps direct component, constituent, portion, bearer-dependent aspect, phase, and collection-belonging claims distinct, while a separately grounded constructive part claim remains possible without another universal relation vocabulary.