A.6.P:7 - Conformance Checklist

1. Recognition. The use begins with one actual relation-bearing claim and states which later claim or operation is blocked by its ambiguity.
2. Grounded heads. Every load-bearing head refers to an exact object or remains explicitly unresolved; a qualifier does not substitute for the head kind.
3. Direct relation. Every positive or governed-negative direct subject-relation result names exact actual participants, an explicit admitted RelationKind token, and the pattern that defines its predicate, participant meanings, obtaining condition, and identity rule. The A.6.P.WMR non-relation result families remain defined or tested by the rules for the recovered Method, Work, result, production, delivery, acceptance, transfer, or receiving-use claim.
4. Participant meanings. The direct pattern states the participant meanings, actual participation, obtaining predicate, applicability, and occurrence-identity rule; every participant retains its independently governed kind.
5. No negative occurrence. Negative assertion, refutation, or unresolved reliance remains claim- or evaluation-side and creates no negative world-side occurrence.
6. Demand-driven declaration. A compatible RelationSignature and declaration-local SlotSpecs appear only when reusable typed use is current; an ordinary assertion may name participants directly.
7. Designation separation. A participant designation or occurrence reference remains content of a receiving episteme and neither replaces the referent nor makes the relation obtain.
8. Hidden arity and qualifiers. Every participant or qualifier included in the repair changes predicate satisfaction, applicability, identity, substitution, interpretation, admissible use, witness needs, or the named later claim or operation.
9. Occurrence threshold. Explicit U.Relation identity appears only when a named receiver needs one occurrence distinguished from another; repeated occurrences with the same participants use the direct identity discriminator.
10. Construction choice. When construction is identity-bearing, the pattern defining that construction names the constructor, inputs, construction work or process, and identity contribution; otherwise the repair introduces no constructor.
11. Object separation. Direct relation kind, participant meaning, actual participant, declaration, assertion, occurrence description, occurrence, designator, reference, publication, Bridge, and representation remain distinct where present.
12. Relation-dependent wording. The reading resolves to world-side actual participation, an assertion- or description-side designation, or a justified C.3 local kind; no fourth qualification object is introduced.
13. Polarity. Participant order, inverse wording, symmetry, assertion polarity, and temporal qualification follow the direct relation law.
14. Changed object. Every change statement selects one exact changed object and its governing row in A.6.P:4.7; no generic relation-edit operation remains.
15. Boundary classification. Apply L, A, D, and E only to an actual A.6.B boundary statement. Before marking A, point to the particular mechanism application and the predicate checked at entry; if either is absent, leave claim use or scope, A.6.P entry or stop, endpoint-kind correction, and Bridge need with their own patterns.
16. Candidate guide and stop. Unresolved alternatives are grounded objects, kinds, or relations with a discriminating check, not a synonym list or representation-first ontology. Until the check selects one reading, the note remains Plain or informative, names the blocked reader, decision, or work and the needed discriminator, and carries no decision, gate, publication, assurance, reliance, or cross-context reuse.
17. Representation boundary. A table, row, field set, tuple, graph edge, functional expression, arrow, formula, or reifier has explicit C.29 correspondence for any relied-on FPF use and does not constitute the represented relation by form.
18. Optional episteme relation or operation. Use this path only when a later task must relate source and receiving epistemes or describe an operation that produces the receiving episteme. Identify both endpoints independently under C.2.1. Use A.6.3 for an exact compatible same-EntityOfConcern construction, A.6.2 for a local effect-free arrow that satisfies its entry and laws, and A.6.4 for an exact different-EntityOfConcern arrow r. Its separate C.2.1 bounded-use assertion q is about exact r and has a ClaimGraph stating the invariant, visible loss, named receiving use, conditions, and affirmative or negative polarity. A separate current-case judgement reports exactly satisfies, fails, or cannot decide from the exact facts; cannot decide names the missing fact and reopen condition. If the selected pattern’s entry or result condition is missing, preserve the endpoints, changed EntityOfConcern if any, and needed sentence as an explicit stop naming the missing arrow, use-claim, or application condition. Keep any continuity relation separate, and use A.15.1 for actual authoring, materialisation, checking, or publication Work. The arrow, use assertion, operation application, and Work remain distinct and none supplies occurrence identity for the repaired world-side relation.
19. Plain relaxation. Short final wording retains a recoverable direct relation, actual participants, and visible escalation points.
20. Neighboring subject result. The repaired claim closes under one exact predicate or constraint selected in A.6.P:4.11, including exactly one of the four A.6.P.WMR families when that specialization is current; the neighboring pattern identifier is only its locator.