Source changed 2026-10-03 17:24:51 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 17:30:20 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 19:00:10 UTC
A.3.1.MR:7 - Conformance Checklist
CC-A3.1.MR-1 — Receiving use and grain. Is the later use clear enough to choose the useful reconstruction grain?
CC-A3.1.MR-2 — Grounded evidence. Are claimed Work occurrences and other sources identified under their own patterns and relations?
CC-A3.1.MR-3 — Source-to-claim trace. Can the reader see which source supports each account claim?
CC-A3.1.MR-4 — Evidence construction. Are selection, naming, correlation, abstraction, configuration, window, and likely missing contributions explicit when they matter?
CC-A3.1.MR-5 — One candidate per account. Does every candidate-account episteme have one candidate reusable-way EntityOfConcern and effective scheme?
CC-A3.1.MR-6 — Rival retained. Are real competing accounts or unresolved ambiguity visible without inventing a rival to complete the form?
CC-A3.1.MR-7 — Useful distinguishing question. Where discrimination changes recovery or downstream use, is the question clear and, if held out, independent of account construction? Does the account remain usable when no answerable investigation is needed or available, with stronger dependent claims withheld?
CC-A3.1.MR-8 — Result branch. Does the result stop at candidate account, separate comparison, record-only result, or named blocker without granting Method or MethodDescription membership?
CC-A3.1.MR-9 — Specialist exit. Is ME.18 used for complete reconstruction only when the receiving use needs its larger burden?
CC-A3.1.MR-10 — Plain use. Can a cold practitioner explain the candidate, evidence, real rivals, gaps and supported current use without a mandatory next-test plan?