A.15.2:4.1 - Definition, membership, and identity

U.WorkPlan is a same-individual dependent kind under U.Episteme. C.2.1 first identifies exact episteme P by:

<exact ClaimGraph, one already identified present EntityOfConcern, effective U.ReferenceScheme>

A.15.2 recognizes that same P as U.WorkPlan when its ClaimGraph substantively declares coordination of possible future performed work over one exact horizon through at least one PlanItem and, when it contains several items, their plan-content organization. The intended-performance designator may denote one proposed future performance, a named repeated-work family, or one bounded proposed group. It remains claim content: planning it neither asserts the existence of a dated Work occurrence nor makes a merely possible performance into C.2.1’s already identified EntityOfConcern.

The present EntityOfConcern is the already identified existing entity that the plan’s claims are about: for example, a system, asset, or promise-content episteme for which work is being coordinated. When the plan claims are expressly about their own coordination commitments, C.2.1’s reflexive option permits P itself. When the claims concern several entities jointly, C.2.1 still requires one independently identified joint EntityOfConcern; otherwise split the claim content rather than filling the position with a list of unrelated or merely possible referents.

The stable positive membership condition is substantive intended-work content. At least one PlanItem must name its intended-performance designator, intended method or method family, planned window or entry condition, intended performer System or local system-role-kind condition, and enough constraints, resources, dependencies, commitments, targets, or baseline to make one coordination decision—for example, reserve a machine, order two items, staff a window, or set the target to be checked later. A calendar picture, ticket title, publication, approval cue, method description, forecast, or list of dates that supplies no such intended-work claims does not gain U.WorkPlan membership by format.

The dependent kind supplies no second identity rule. Changing exact ClaimGraph content, the present EntityOfConcern, or the effective U.ReferenceScheme identifies another episteme under C.2.1. An explicit EpistemeEditionRelation may preserve historical continuity only when its own predicate obtains. Changing only a file path, carrier, layout, publication occurrence, ticket key, or version label leaves identity unchanged when the three C.2.1 discriminators are preserved.

Planned Methods, possible-performance designators, intended performer Systems, local system-role-kind conditions, windows, desired fillings, capability-fit requirements, resource budgets, dependencies, commitments, acceptance targets, and expected effects are claim content or separately governed planned claims. They establish no dated Work occurrence, obtaining U.SystemRoleAssignment, capability-fit result, actual participant, resource use, Transformation, result value, result episteme, produced entity, delivery, acceptance verdict, or downstream outcome.

Strict distinction (memory aid): Method = how in principle. MethodDescription = how it is written. WorkPlan = when, by whom in intent, under which constraints. Work = how it went this time.