A.16.0:4.6 - Endpoint docking and next use
A trajectory does not need to terminate to be useful. What matters is a visible docking milestone to the next pattern-based question or later use.
Typical next-use patterns include:
A.6.Pfor relation precision or repair;A.6.Afor an action invitation;C.16.Qfor quality or evaluative-characterization wording repair;B.5.2for abductive inquiry;A.15.2for planning future Work, including its target Method;C.25for quality-family decomposition and Q-Bundle structure.
Name the next pattern and what its content defines, constrains, or tests. The account already identifies the selected episteme edition; add a project record, particular publication form, or publication occurrence only when that distinction changes the next use. This is next-use docking, not a transfer of responsibility, and a pattern reference alone does not prove endpoint admission.
Separate responsibility-handoff branch. Open this branch only when responsibility, commitment, permission, or authority actually changes. Name the exact relation before and after the change under its applicable pattern, then the participants in that relation’s own roles. Include giving and receiving admitted systems when its predicate requires them and, when their system-role classification matters, the exact system-role kinds and assignments through which they participate. State its governed object or action, scope, effective interval, and any assigning, instituting, revoking, or superseding act that the relation requires. The trajectory account cites that relation and its history; episteme lineage, publication form, publication occurrence, endpoint admission, and next-use docking neither create nor prove it.
After docking to a next use, monitoring, maintenance, revisit, or later re-entry may continue through new lineage entries or later trajectories. Keep lineage continuity separate from the current endpoint use and from any separately established responsibility or authority relation.