A.6.3.NAR:1 - Problem frame
Use this pattern when selected source structure must become a readable sequential account for a declared reader or listener use. In plain language: turn this structure into a narrative that this reader can follow without hiding what the narrative leaves behind. Typical cases include a scientific mechanism turned into a paper section, an architecture trade-off turned into a team explanation, a conceptual graph turned into a lesson sequence, or an event graph turned into a story draft.
Start from the reader’s practical need, not from an identity dossier. Select the relations, constraints, events, mechanisms, dependencies, conflicts, alternatives, or changes that matter for that need; choose a useful order and connective account; draft the smallest narrative that works; then compare it with the source material for preservation, foregrounding, loss, and unsupported additions.
Plain starting vocabulary:
| Term | Plain meaning |
|---|---|
source material | The episteme, publication, model, graph, architecture description or view, evidence set, situation record, event stream, proof field, or source pack from which the narrative is prepared. In an exact case, distinguish the source episteme from every form, carrier, world-side object, or additional input. |
selected source structures | The relations, constraints, events, mechanisms, dependencies, conflicts, alternatives, or changes that must remain recoverable for the reader’s use. |
source-structure selection rationale | Why these structures, rather than other available structures, serve this reader or listener use. |
source temporal posture | Whether the material concerns retrospective or reverse-engineered actuality, live unfolding, prospective planned structure, prospective fiction or canon, or a mixed case. State it only when it changes how the narrative may be read. |
rendering mediation mode | Whether the narrative uses source claims directly or depends on an architecture description, view, decision, telemetry record, or another independently identified description. |
reader or listener use | What the reader or listener must understand, decide, predict, reconstruct, or do after using the narrative. |
ordering and connective account | The chosen event, causal, discovery, didactic, tension, traversal, or other order, plus the links that explain why one step follows another. |
narrative rendering | The receiving sequential account. A page, audio file, slide, or publication carrier can express or make it available without being the account’s claim-bearing identity. |
loss and return | What the narrative omits, weakens, rearranges, or cannot support, and where the reader returns when that missing structure matters. |
narrating or rendering worker | The person, team, or system doing the narrative-construction work. Recover the exact worker, system-role assignment, method, and dated Work only when actual production history matters; establish any authority claim separately. |
structural-information question | How much of the selected source structure can this reader correctly extract from the narrative under the stated preparation, access and budget? Use C.2.8 for the characteristic, C.33 for architecture-use adequacy and the applicable domain evaluation for a local scale. |
First useful move. Write the shortest useful narrative and place a compact narrative note beside it: reader/use; source material; selected structures and why they matter; ordering/connective account; what is preserved and foregrounded; what is omitted, weakened, or newly asserted without support; admissible use; and the return trigger. Use F.19:4’s plausible-reader test for any optional non-admissible downstream use. This note is a reading aid.
What goes wrong if missed. A memorable sequence substitutes for the source structure. Readers retain the story but cannot reconstruct the relations that licensed it, or they treat a connective sentence added for fluency as a source claim.
What this buys. Narrative ordering can make tangled structure usable while selection, sequence, loss, unsupported strengthening, and return remain inspectable. The narrative does not thereby become proof, authority, evidence, architecture, publication, work history, or the selected source structure itself.
Ordinary use. For low-reliance teaching, orientation, or internal explanation, the useful narrative and compact note are enough. Exact endpoint identities and a formal construction record are not prerequisites for this first result.
Reliance-facing use. Open the exact branch only when the receiving use makes claim-level identity and preservation evidence material: for example, the narrative must travel independently, be cited or disputed, cross a material representation-scheme boundary for consequential use, enter generated-output admission under an identity-bearing receiver, support consequential reliance, or satisfy another named receiver that requires exact identity. A public context is a cue to ask which receiving requirement applies; publicness alone is not sufficient. Then recover exact source episteme X, receiving narrative episteme Y, and construction n : X -> Y, together with the additional source chain, scheme relation, loss, evidence, or assurance actually required by that receiving use.
Carrier export, generated-output admission, publication, evidence, assurance, ethics, and work authorization are separate questions; apply the corresponding pattern only when that claim is current.