A.6.B:8.4.5 - Example 3 — Management (project “approved or aligned”)

A.6.B:8.4.5.1 - Draft sentence (non-conformant)

“The project is approved.”

A.6.B:8.4.5.2 - Atomize + Classify

L-PRJ-01 (Definition). approved(project, approvalKind) is defined as a relation kind; approval kinds include: “sponsor-signoff”, “stage-gate-pass”, “budget-authorized”, “staffing-assigned”, etc. (Truth-conditional: disambiguates kind and polarity.)

A-PRJ-01 (Gate predicate: stage entry). For starting execution work, ExecutionAdmissible(project) holds iff required approvals are present and required prerequisites are satisfied (e.g., risk review completed, budget line exists, key roles staffed). (This is the real “may start work” entry predicate; it references L-PRJ-01 for what counts as approvals. If “approved” is meant as permission rather than gate evidence, use the permission-word branch in §8.4.1. An approval registry entry or evidence carrier alone remains source/display evidence and is not a grant.)

D-PRJ-01 (Duty). Admitted project-coordination system ProjectCoordinator-A is the actual duty bearer of separately obtaining ProjectEntryCommitment-PRJ-01 : U.Commitment; it SHALL not initiate execution unless A-PRJ-01 holds, SHALL keep the approval registry current, and SHALL retain or expose the evidence carriers referenced in E-PRJ-02. (References A-PRJ-01 and E-PRJ-02 by ID.)

E-PRJ-01 (Gate decision result). At Γ_time=snapshot(t), ProjectEntryGateResult-P-t : GateDecisionResult has gateRef=ProjectEntryGate-P, decisionSubjectRef=ProjectEntryClaim-P-t, boundedActionRef=StartExecution-P, and profileApplicationRef=ProjectEntryProfileApplication-P-t. That application of ProjectEntryProfile-v3 uses the complete required set {ApprovalCheck-P-t, RiskReviewCheck-P-t, BudgetCheck-P-t, StaffingCheck-P-t} : GateCheckApplicationResult[]; each exact application reports its checked subject and criterion, has sourceOutcome=satisfied, and maps to pass. The result records decisionValue=pass, action consequence “start StartExecution-P within the admitted project-entry window”, the project-entry scope and window, and recheck on any changed approval, risk-review, budget, staffing, profile, scope, or window. (This actual E-* result applies the inputs named by A-PRJ-01; it is neither the A-* predicate nor performed execution Work.)

E-PRJ-02 (Evidence for reliance). For reliance on E-PRJ-01, the exact observed carrier set is {DecisionRecord-R7, MeetingMinutes-M3, BudgetLine-B4, StaffingAssignments-S2, GateChecklistSnapshot-G9}. An A.10 evidence-provenance path links those carriers to the four exact GateCheckApplicationResult values and ProjectEntryGateResult-P-t. GateChecklistSnapshot-G9 displays the result; its presence alone establishes neither a check result nor the gate decision. (References A-PRJ-01 and E-PRJ-01; avoids RFC deontics.)

A.6.B:8.4.5.3 - Readable recomposition

Tech bundle:

• “Approved” is not one relation: L-PRJ-01 defines approval kinds.
• “May start execution” is a gate predicate: A-PRJ-01.
• ProjectCoordinator-A’s project-entry duty: D-PRJ-01.
• The actual A.21 gate result is E-PRJ-01; its bounded A.10 evidence support is E-PRJ-02.

Plain paragraph: “Instead of a generic ‘approved’, we select an explicit approval kind as defined in L-PRJ-01 and treat ‘may start execution’ as an admissibility predicate (A-PRJ-01). ProjectCoordinator-A has the project-entry and registry-maintenance duties stated in D-PRJ-01. At snapshot t, the current A.21 profile application maps every required check-application result to pass; E-PRJ-01 records decisionValue=pass with the action consequence ‘start StartExecution-P within the stated window’, and E-PRJ-02 supplies the exact evidence path for reliance on that result.”

A.6.B:8.4.5.4 - Filled permission case (each sentence classified)

E-CAL-01 (Instituting communicative Work). Admitted system MaintenanceCoordinator-A performed dated CalibrationGrantAct-17 : U.SpeechAct under MaintenanceCoordinator-A@DayShift; that obtaining assignment has the system as holder and covers the act. In this filled case, CalibrationGrantPolicy-v4 does not require a separate authority relation, so none is asserted. The assignment supplies no authority and performs no act. CalibrationGrantAct-17 satisfies the policy in PlantCalibrationContext and is the actual instituting Work. A policy variant that does require grant authority must cite one exact obtaining authority relation under its direct predicate or stop at missing-governor[grant authority].

D-CAL-01 (Grant position). MaintenanceCalibrationGrant-17 : GrantedPermissionRelation@Context, instituted by CalibrationGrantAct-17—the actual speech act stated in E-CAL-01—permits beneficiary MaintenanceTechnicianSystemRole to run CalibrationProcedure-v3 in Zone 8 during ServiceWindow-17. CalibrationGrantPolicy-v4 remains current, the grant still covers that system-role kind, procedure, zone, and window, and no valid revocation or supersession has ended this occurrence; this D-* claim records the grant but does not institute it.

A-CAL-01 (Gate predicate). CalibrationEntryAdmissible(plan, checkTime) holds only if MaintenanceCalibrationGrant-17 is current for the plan’s beneficiary, action, zone, and time and no applicable permission/norm conflict finding is unresolved. The predicate takes those inputs; it creates neither the grant, a conflict result, nor an actual gate decision.

E-CAL-02 (Actual Work and actor). Through its A.13 core, admitted system Tech-17 is the exact actual performer for this case under obtaining assignment Tech-17@Shift-B, whose holder is Tech-17 and whose extent covers the early part of ServiceWindow-17. A.15.1 independently admits dated CalibrationWork-17B : U.Work from that performer, its Method, extent, and containing-System facts. Because this filled case expressly claims precise assignment-bound attribution, F.6 separately relates CalibrationWork-17B to that same assignment. The assignment neither acts nor identifies the performer; failed attribution would leave the Work intact and remove only the under-assignment claim.

E-CAL-03 (Optional exercise claim). Because this case asks whether the grant was used, CalibrationExercise-17B : PermissionExerciseRelation@Context connects CalibrationWork-17B to MaintenanceCalibrationGrant-17: the Work instantiates CalibrationProcedure-v3; Tech-17@Shift-B is an assignment occurrence whose declared species uses MaintenanceTechnicianSystemRoleKindDomain as its assigned-kind domain, and the occurrence supplies MaintenanceTechnicianSystemRole as the value admitted by that domain; and the Work occurs in Zone 8 within ServiceWindow-17 while the grant is current. If the action or beneficiary test failed, this exercise relation would not obtain.

D-CAL-02 (Exercise non-use boundary). The authoring rule says to add E-CAL-03 only when the reader needs to know whether the grant was exercised; otherwise stop with the separately named grant and Work. This is a generic prescription for boundary text, not a claim that one particular author bears an individual U.Commitment.

E-CAL-04 (Later non-violation finding). Through its A.13 core, admitted system ComplianceEvaluator-4 is the exact actual performer under obtaining assignment ComplianceEvaluator-4@QualityShift. A.15.1 independently admits dated CalibrationComplianceEvaluation-17B : U.Work; because this finding expressly preserves precise assignment-bound attribution, F.6 separately relates that Work to the same assignment. The Work checked CalibrationWork-17B against current PlantCalibrationNormativeFrame-17, explicitly complete enough for this technician, procedure, zone, and evaluation window, and returned CalibrationNonViolation-17B : NonViolationFinding@Context(result=nonViolating). A stale or insufficient frame would return unresolved; a missing or failed F.6 relation would instead leave the Work and evaluation result intact while removing only the attribution.

E-CAL-05 (Evidence for reliance). An A.10 evidence-provenance path links the exact CalibrationNonViolation-17B finding to CalibrationComplianceEvaluation-17B, ComplianceEvaluator-4@QualityShift, CalibrationRunLog-17B, the log’s source and currentness relations, and the bounded audit context. The path supports reliance on the finding; the log, assignment, and path do not perform the evaluation or create its result.

E-CAL-06 (Unresolved conflict). After CalibrationWork-17B and its evaluation, Zone8EntryProhibition-17 becomes current for the same beneficiary, action, zone, and the remaining service window, including the calibration action specified by CalibrationWorkPlan-17C; no applicable rule selects an outcome and no authorized dated decision Work with a current resolution result exists. CalibrationConflict-17 : PermissionNormConflictFinding@Context therefore remains unresolved.

E-CAL-07 (Source/display fact). SignedGrantRecord-17 and GreenPermitTile-17 are visible carriers in this case; their presence is an observed source/display claim only.

E-CAL-08 (Gate decision result). At the later entry check, CalibrationEntryResult-17C : GateDecisionResult has gateRef=CalibrationEntryGate-17, decisionSubjectRef=CalibrationWorkPlan-17C, boundedActionRef=StartCalibrationProcedure-v3-in-Zone8-17C, and profileApplicationRef=CalibrationEntryProfileApplication-17C. The current profile application uses the complete required set {CalibrationGrantCurrentCheck-17C, CalibrationConflictResolvedCheck-17C} : GateCheckApplicationResult[]: the current-grant application maps to pass, while the exact CalibrationConflict-17=unresolved source outcome maps to block. The result records decisionValue=block, action consequence “hold CalibrationWorkPlan-17C outside entry”, the remaining Zone 8 service scope and window, and recheck when the grant, conflict result, profile, scope, or window changes. It neither resolves the conflict nor revokes MaintenanceCalibrationGrant-17.

L-CAL-01 (Tempting wrong classification, rejected). “The visible permit is D, so the grant exists, the Work exercised it, and the Work was non-violating” is not one atomic claim and is false as a classification shortcut. The carrier observation is E-CAL-07; the grant, exercise, evaluation finding, and E-CAL-08 gate result remain the separately classified claims above.