A.6.P.WMR:11 - SoTA-Echoing
Informative source comparison. These rows classify source use and its effect on the Solution; they add no practitioner or modeled-world obligation.
These sources answer different practice questions. Provenance, metrology, and project-planning vocabularies expose useful distinctions and recurrent compression risks; none admits an FPF kind, makes a work or participant relation obtain, or replaces the three-question ordinary recovery and its two conditional assurance questions.
The three-question ordinary recovery, two conditional assurance questions, and four-exit architecture are an FPF-scoped synthesis hypothesis for one claim whose exact thing is known while its work or method boundary relation or one material claim distinction remains hidden. The cited traditions neither establish that architecture nor authorize it outside this boundary. The synthesis reopens if repeated subject practice yields a stable direct governor that replaces a branch, or if a trigger case cannot close through one of the four exits without new ontology.
| Exact source and currentness role | Adopted or adapted move in A.6.P.WMR | Rejected overread and practical effect |
|---|---|---|
| W3C, PROV-DM: The PROV Data Model and Constraints of the PROV Data Model, W3C Recommendations, 2013. Mature provenance-model lineage, not current work ontology. | Adapt. The distinction between usage and generation is preserved while sections 4.3, 5, 5.1, and 5.7 recover the exact FPF subject-use, operation binding, entity-identity inception, production, publication, and receiving-use claims separately. | A provenance activity, used or wasGeneratedBy record, or recorded time makes none of those FPF relations obtain by itself. PROV generation is not imported as a universal FPF production or result relation. |
| JCGM, International Vocabulary of Metrology, VIM 2.9 — measurement result, official VIM3 online entry. Current measurement-result subject comparator. | Adopt and adapt. The measurand, attributed values, uncertainty, and relevant-information discipline are retained; sections 4.7 and 5.1-5.5 therefore keep instrument or operation output, measurement-result episteme, diagnostic finding, evaluation verdict, and downstream subject effect separate. | A measurement-local input or output role does not create a work input/output kind, and a value, indication, report, or verdict does not become the changed entity or downstream outcome by the word result. |
| Project Management Institute, PMI Lexicon of Project Management Terms, version 5.0, January 2026. Current official planning and work-name vocabulary comparator. | Adapt. The Lexicon’s distinct activity, WBS, work-package, output, result, and deliverable terms expose the metonymy repaired in 4.8 and the machining, Car 42, and authoring cases. A WBS or Work Package remains plan or assignment content until A.15.1 occurrence grounding is present. | A named plan element, scheduled activity, expected deliverable, output, or result proves no dated Work occurrence admitted under U.Work, enacted method, actual participant, production, delivery, acceptance, or downstream effect. The source vocabulary is not FPF ontology. |
| PeopleCert, PRINCE2 Project Management Foundation (Version 7), official public Foundation certification/product page. Currentness and broad-practice comparator only. | Bounded reference only. The page establishes the public Version 7 offering and describes seven recurring project-management practices. It does not expose the detailed product, product-description, activity, or Work Package distinctions, so A.6.P.WMR does not attribute section 4.8’s morphology or work-name rule to this page. | Neither Version 7 status nor broad practice language makes any planning entity, activity, Work Package, performed work, production, delivery, acceptance, or receiving-use claim obtain. An exact official locus is required before detailed product-planning distinctions can become load-bearing source evidence. |
For a practitioner encountering one of these standard vocabularies, the action is the same: preserve its bounded provenance, measurement, or planning meaning, then ask what exact thing is named, relative to what exact object, and what direct verb or stop is justified. Open the two assurance questions only when a material ambiguity or receiving use needs them. The standard term is evidence about likely interpretation, not the direct relation’s governor.
Currentness checked on 2026-07-21. PMI version 5.0 is the January 2026 Lexicon; the current public PeopleCert page presents Foundation Version 7 and seven broad practices but no detailed product-planning semantics; the JCGM VIM3 2.9 entry remains the official online measurement-result definition; and the latest published PROV-DM remains the 2013 Recommendation, so it is used only as mature lineage. The adaptations reopen when PMI changes the relevant activity, work-package, output, result, or deliverable distinctions; when PeopleCert publishes or identifies an exact official locus for any detailed PRINCE2 product-planning distinction proposed as load-bearing here; when JCGM changes the measurement-result boundary; or when a successor provenance model changes usage or generation semantics for the declared comparison.