A.2.3:1 - Problem frame

Across domains the word service is used for many different things: a server or provider, an API, a procedure, a run, a department, even a product bundle. Such polysemy is productive in everyday speech. In a normative model, the current claim must identify which referent is meant.

FPF therefore reserves U.PromiseContent for one kernel meaning: a consumer-facing promise content clause. When service denotes something else, use A.6.P:4.11a to recover whether it denotes code or another episteme, a Method, a Work occurrence or ordinary run, provider participation, an exact bearer or access-providing arrangement, permission, status, or a direct relation. A product label chooses none of these readings, and bare service has no default system reading. After recovery, name the referent or relation. Apply A.1 or A.1.SCR only when the recovered referent is an entity and the claim depends on its being a system.

This keeps the kernel minimal while keeping the prose readable to non‑mathematicians: the canonical symbol is U.PromiseContent, and the head kind in normative text is always promise content.

Plain reading. A promise content says what a consumer may rely on. A provider System can be classified under a local provider system-role kind. When a claim needs exact delivery Work, use A.13 to identify the System that actually did it. A.15.1 then admits the dated occurrence as Work from its Method, history, extent, and containing System, without relying on F.6. If the current use also needs to say exactly under which assignment that Work was performed, F.6 checks the separate relation against the same assignment used by A.13. A U.MethodDescription describes the Method.

PromiseContentUse obtains between the delivery-work occurrence and the selected promise-content edition during the named interval. Work-participation, affected-referent, change, delivery, and acceptance relations state what happened.

A separately performed evaluation applies the declared operation or method; its result binding states the evaluation value. If another use needs a verdict episteme, use C.2.1 to identify it and A.15.PROD to state any applicable entity-identity-inception claim. Evidence relations support the relied-on assertions.

Lexical note (L-SERV and A.6.P:4.11a). Bare service does not determine one FPF referent. When that word carries a relied-on claim, use A.6.P:4.11a to recover the concrete referent or relation: for example, a promise-content episteme and an access-point system have different kinds and participate in different relations. E.10 L-SERV triggers that recovery. After recovery, name the referent or relation and use the pattern that defines or constrains the current claim. Resolve the defining or constraining ClaimGraph only when this claim or a named later use depends on a particular rule edition; the pattern id then serves as its locator.