A.6.RCD:11 - SoTA-Echoing
| Practice or source line | What this pattern uses | What it rejects or bounds |
|---|---|---|
| W3C OWL 2 Structural Specification inverse object properties and property-chain axioms | Typed inverse and composition examples constrain the substrate-authority test in 4.2 and the supply-chain reachability case in 5.3: direction, shared participants, and the selected chain law remain explicit. | An OWL axiom neither establishes FPF equivalence nor supplies world-side obtaining or occurrence identity; case 5.3 still stops at a local claim or predicate definition unless the subject practice separately supplies occurrence semantics. |
| Alloy language reference relational restriction, transpose, join, product, union, difference, and closure | This mature explicit-operator substrate constrains 4.2 and the supply-chain reachability replay in 5.3, including direction, closure, zero-length, and cycle policy. | Alloy syntax is not a universal FPF constructor algebra and does not admit relation kinds; case 5.3’s kind branch remains stopped until a direct subject practice supplies action-facing occurrence semantics and identity. |
| W3C SPARQL 1.1 Property Paths | Query-local path and closure semantics for the reachability worked case. | A successful path query is not an obtaining relation occurrence and its result-row identity is not occurrence identity. |
| Florio and Linnebo, Introduction to Constructional Ontology, 2024, and Borgo and Righetti, Towards Applied Constructional Ontology, 2025 | Their constructor, input, process, and output-identity distinctions are adapted as a discriminating probe for the occurrence-semantics gate in 4.6 and the primitive-candidate stop in 5.5: authors MUST state in the candidate’s direct subject rule which construction is identity-bearing. | A construction description or inherited source category neither constitutes FPF work or a relation occurrence nor admits a relation kind; 5.5 remains stopped until the direct subject practice supplies its own obtaining and identity law. |
| Chris Partridge, BORO Ontology, C-FORS 2025 presentation; current bounded extensional comparator | Its temporal-extent, recurrence, and ontology-evolution pressure is adapted for the occurrence-identity requirements in 4.6 and the primitive-candidate stop in 5.5: a temporal gap distinguishes repeated occurrences only when the direct subject rule adopts that discriminator. | FPF rejects universal 4D identity, unrestricted composition, and BORO category architecture. Reopen this bounded comparison if a later BORO edition or a direct FPF identity rule changes whether temporal extent is action-relevant for the 4.6/5.5 stop. |
| Almeida, Guizzardi, Sales, and Fonseca, gUFO, 2026 preprint relation-reification comparison | Its differentiated relational-aspect and reification patterns stress the object boundary in 4.4 and the occurrence-identity and primitive-candidate stops in 4.6 and 5.5. | FPF adapts those distinctions as a current comparison but rejects an OWL class, property, reifier, or imported category hierarchy as proof of obtaining or occurrence identity; the candidate remains stopped until its direct subject rule supplies both. |
Reopen these source-use decisions when a selected substrate changes its operator semantics, a newer practice invalidates one of the representation boundaries, or a direct FPF relation pattern supplies a more action-capable derivation or identity rule without worse ontology truth, reader use, or modeling cost.