A.6.REL:4 - Solution
Local relation-occurrence mantra. State the direct relation. Ask whether later work must distinguish repeated occurrences. If no, stop. If yes, apply the direct identity rule and add only the exact receiving object.
Use A.22.CGUS when a receiving use needs a reusable constraint-governed unfolding structure for these continuations and stops.
A.6.REL:4.1 - Apply the relation-object architecture discipline
Relation-object architecture discipline names the rule set in this subsection. Conforming prose keeps the objects around one direct relation distinct, names the direct relation between adjacent objects, and uses a recoverable name for each current object. A.6.5 specializes only the SlotSpec part of this rule set.
Short use rule. State the world-side relation and its actual participants first. Add another named object from the relation-object architecture only when the current receiving use depends on that exact object, and state its direct relation to the object already in view. The tables below help select that additional object and relation; they are not a mandatory form for ordinary relation prose.
The world-side relation comes first. An actual relation participant is one exact U.Entity participating in one obtaining relation occurrence under one relation-participant meaning. Participation leaves the entity under its independently governed intrinsic kind. A relation occurrence is the obtaining U.Relation occurrence itself. The direct relation obtains when the actual participants satisfy the obtaining predicate; the occurrence-identity rule provides the criteria for reidentification, continuity, and distinction from another occurrence. Signatures, assertions, names, references, and representations retain their separate identities.
A.6.REL:4.1.1 - World-side objects
| Canonical FPF name | What this object is | Direct relation to preserve | Naming rule | Subject pattern |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| actual relation participant | one exact U.Entity; this is a relation-qualified use of the entity, not a new kind | the entity participates in this relation occurrence under one relation-participant meaning | use the entity’s direct kind and current name; use a governed designator only when naming or reference is current; in relation prose add the domain participant meaning, as in Robot-7 as the holder system | the participant’s direct pattern and the direct relation pattern |
| relation occurrence | one obtaining occurrence admitted under U.Relation | the occurrence has the actual participants and is classified by the direct relation kind; it obtains when those participants satisfy the relation obtaining predicate within its applicability | use the readable direct relation sentence until stable occurrence reference is needed; then use a relation-occurrence designator assigned after the identity rule is applicable | the direct relation pattern and A.6.REL |
The phrase actual relation participant therefore never replaces the entity’s own name. It says how that entity participates in this occurrence. Likewise, the readable sentence Robot-7 is assigned as inspector through InspectionAssignment-17 can state the direct assignment without first creating a relation-occurrence description episteme.
A.6.REL:4.1.2 - Relation-kind settlement
The relation kind is a classificatory distinction over relation occurrences. Every admitted direct or derived relation kind has one direct subject settlement that states relation-participant meanings, an obtaining predicate, applicability, and an occurrence-identity rule as semantic and rule content. A derived kind additionally names its base-definition and substrate dependencies. Ordinary use may omit explicit individuation when no receiver needs it; that omission does not mean the identity rule is absent. World-side entities participate according to the settlement while retaining their own kinds.
| Canonical FPF name | What this object is | Direct relation to preserve | Naming rule | Subject pattern |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| relation kind | a classificatory distinction whose individuals are relation occurrences; E.24.UK admits a durable U-kind only when the direct relation pattern supplies the required witness, while a narrower relation distinction remains governed without automatic U.* admission | classifies relation occurrences governed by one obtaining predicate and one occurrence-identity rule | use the accepted domain relation name; a new durable Tech name follows E.24.UK admission and F.18 naming, while morphology alone establishes neither | the direct relation pattern and A.6.REL; E.24.UK when durable U-kind admission is current |
| relation-participant meaning | relation-local semantic content specifying one domain contribution to the obtaining predicate | says how one actual participant contributes to the obtaining predicate while that participant retains its intrinsic kind | use the domain meaning declared by the direct pattern, such as holder System or assigned local system-role kind in an A.2.1 direct species; keep it local to that relation kind | the direct relation pattern |
| relation obtaining predicate | truth-valued rule content over the actual participants considered under their relation-participant meanings | satisfaction of this predicate is the stated criterion for the direct relation obtaining | use the exact condition from the subject pattern, such as the predicate of one directly declared species under U.SystemRoleAssignment; notation used to express it keeps its source name; use C.29 for a declared mathematical-lens use | the direct relation pattern |
| relation occurrence-identity rule | rule content for reidentifying one occurrence and distinguishing it from another | a system applies this rule only after relevant current-case facts or constituting history satisfy the direct obtaining predicate and later work needs occurrence identity | name the exact world-side discriminator supplied by the direct relation pattern, such as participant-determined identity or maximal continuous obtaining interval | the direct relation pattern and A.6.REL |
Public name settlement. The following F.18 NameCard names the already governed root occurrence kind. It neither admits a new kind nor makes a relation obtain.
NameCard:
NameCardId: NC-U-RELATION
GovernedValueRef: U.Relation under A.6.REL
SubjectPatternLocator: A.6.REL
ReferenceScheme: FPFCoreReferenceScheme
LocalSenseRef: individuable obtaining relation occurrence whose direct pattern supplies participants, obtaining conditions, and identity
TechLabel: U.Relation
PlainLabel: relation occurrence
CandidateSet: U.Relation; U.RelationOccurrence; U.ObtainingRelation; U.IndividuatedRelation
RejectedCandidates: longer candidates expose occurrence or obtaining but lose the established root retrieval head; U.Relation remains safe only with the A.6.REL identity discipline
SelectionRationale: preserve the root name while distinguishing existence, kind admission, explicit individuation, identifier assignment, and reference use
PublicRowStatus: pending
LineageEntries: existing local U.Relation declarations narrowed to individuable obtaining occurrences
RefreshCondition: reopen if direct relation patterns cannot supply stable occurrence identity for an admitted relation kind
Use U.Relation for the admitted root kind only. A direct relation kind keeps its own governed name, participant meanings, obtaining predicate, and occurrence-identity rule.
In the world-side relation, the actual entities participate directly under the relation-participant meanings. When assertions and descriptions need typed reuse, a reusable declaration episteme declares those meanings without becoming the world-side relation.
A.6.REL:4.1.3 - Reusable declaration episteme
| Canonical FPF name | What this object is | Direct relation to preserve | Naming rule | Subject pattern |
|---|---|---|---|---|
RelationSignature | a U.Signature declaration episteme whose EntityOfConcern is the direct relation kind | its content states a reusable declaration of the relation-participant meanings, obtaining predicate, applicability, occurrence-identity rule, and only the SlotSpecs needed by receiving typed uses | name the declaration episteme from its accepted direct relation species, for example the RelationSignature for MaintenanceInspectionAssignment; the name denotes the declaration episteme, not the relation kind or an occurrence | A.6.0 |
SlotSpec | a declaration-content component identified inside one exact RelationSignature by its declaration-local SlotKind | corresponds to one relation-participant meaning and states the actual participant ValueKind plus the receiving-episteme designation mode | use the exact declaration-local name supplied by the subject pattern, such as HolderSystemSlot in the MaintenanceInspectionAssignment signature; refer to the complete component as that SlotSpec in the named RelationSignature | A.6.5 |
SlotKind, ValueKind, and refMode answer different questions. SlotKind identifies the declaration component locally. ValueKind is the independently governed kind of the actual relation participant. refMode states how a receiving episteme designates that participant. Together they specify one declaration component; world-side entities and occurrences keep their independently governed identities.
A.6.REL:4.1.4 - Claim and description epistemes
| Canonical FPF name | What this object is | Direct relation to preserve | Naming rule | Subject pattern |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| relation-participant designation | a value or governed reference in a receiving episteme; it retains its own value kind or RefKind | denotes the actual relation participant through the content position corresponding to one declared SlotSpec | name the value or reference under its own governor and effective reference scheme; if a concrete representation field carries it, keep that field’s source name and state the explicit declaration or representation correspondence to the SlotKind; equal spelling is only a representation choice, never object identity | C.2.1, A.6.5, and F.18 when durable naming is current |
| relational assertion | a claim-bearing U.Episteme | its content states affirmative or negative assertion polarity for the direct obtaining predicate with relation-participant designations; an affirmative assertion may designate an already individuated occurrence only after current case facts or constituting history satisfy that predicate and the direct identity rule has been applied; the assertion states that result; assertion form alone does not establish or constitute the occurrence; a forecast, scenario, counterfactual, permission, or other claim family keeps its own direct semantics, while supported, refuted, or unresolved reliance belongs to A.10 or the receiving evaluation | name the asserted direct relation and its polarity; name the exact direct claim family whenever ordinary affirmation or denial is insufficient | C.2.1, the direct claim pattern, and A.10 or the receiving evaluation for reliance |
| relation-occurrence description episteme | a U.Episteme whose EntityOfConcern is one explicitly individuated relation occurrence | describes that occurrence without replacing it; description form alone does not supply occurrence identity | use description of <relation-occurrence designator> in readable prose; give a reusable description-episteme kind its own governed name only when another use depends on that kind | C.2.1 |
A receiving episteme contains a relation-participant designation in a content position corresponding to one declared SlotSpec. A concrete representation may carry that designation in a field, but the field keeps its source name and corresponds to the declaration-local SlotKind only through an explicit declaration or representation correspondence. Reusing the SlotKind spelling for convenience does not identify the field, SlotKind, designation, or participant. The designation denotes the actual participant; the participant remains a U.Entity, the obtaining occurrence remains a U.Relation, and the receiving episteme keeps its own C.2.1 identity.
A.6.REL:4.1.5 - Naming, reference, and representation
| Canonical FPF name | What this object is | Direct relation to preserve | Naming rule | Subject pattern |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| relation-occurrence designator | a name associated with one already recoverable relation occurrence under a naming relation and effective reference scheme | designates the occurrence; assignment of the designator does not create or individuate it | apply F.18; select a name that exposes enough of the direct relation and identity distinction for its receiving use | F.18 |
| relation-occurrence reference | a reference value of one exact RefKind under an effective U.ReferenceScheme | a system applying the governed resolution method obtains the already recoverable relation occurrence as referent | use the exact governed RefKind whose declared referent range admits this relation kind; a field ending in Ref names the reference value, not the occurrence | F.18 and the direct RefKind pattern |
| representation element | an element of a declared representation | represents an object, claim content, or declaration, or corresponds to one independently governed object in this relation-object architecture | keep the source representation’s own name and state an explicit correspondence naming both the source element and the FPF object; do not rename the source element into that object | the applicable representation or representation-transition pattern; C.29 when a mathematical-lens use is claimed |
A source-specific term remains the name of its source-side object until an explicit correspondence is stated. That correspondence never identifies a source representation element with the represented FPF object. Representation preservation stays with the selected representation or representation-transition pattern; C.29 governs a declared mathematical-lens use. Structural equivalence goes to C.34, and cross-context sameness goes to A.6.9.
A.6.REL:4.1.6 - Use the subject pattern for the current object
| Current question | Subject pattern |
|---|---|
| What relation obtains, under which participant meanings, predicate, and identity rule? | the direct relation pattern, with A.6.REL for occurrence individuation |
| What reusable declaration and SlotSpecs are needed? | A.6.0 and A.6.5 |
| What assertion or description episteme is current? | C.2.1 and the direct claim or description pattern |
| What durable designator or reference is current? | F.18 and the direct reference pattern |
| What selected representation element is current, and what object or claim content does it represent? | the selected representation or representation-transition pattern; C.29 when a mathematical-lens use is claimed |
| Which object is hidden by unresolved source wording? | A.6.P, A.6.RSIR, and E.10, followed by the subject pattern recovered there |
Only systems perform authoring, evaluation, individuation, naming, reference-resolution, and representation work. Relation occurrences obtain; epistemes contain declarations, assertions, and descriptions; names and references stand in governed designation relations. This grammar keeps agency with systems without suppressing the semantic relations that make the relation-object architecture useful.
A.6.REL:4.1.7 - Name only the minimum current object
The relation-object architecture organizes the distinct objects that may become current. For each relation sentence, select only the object needed by the current use. Stable relation-kind semantics belong once in the direct relation pattern or ontic. A reusable declaration belongs once in its RelationSignature. A durable name belongs once in its F.18 naming settlement. Later prose names the object current for its use and cites the subject pattern for already established neighboring objects.
| Current use | Minimum sufficient text | Add another object only when |
|---|---|---|
| ordinary direct relation assertion | one readable direct relation sentence naming the actual participants | predicate interpretation or occurrence identity changes the next engineering move |
| repeated typed assertion or description episteme | cite the direct RelationSignature; carry exact relation-participant designations in content positions corresponding to its SlotSpecs; if a concrete representation field carries one, keep its source name and state the explicit declaration or representation correspondence | the declaration, ValueKind, RefKind, designation, or correspondence itself is under examination |
| occurrence-dependent assertion or description episteme | use the relation-occurrence designator or reference and cite the direct occurrence-identity rule | participant meaning, obtaining, continuity, or repeated-occurrence identity is disputed |
| representation-dependent use | name the source representation element, the represented FPF object or claim content, and their explicit correspondence | representation preservation or loss is current under its applicable pattern, structural equivalence is current under C.34, or cross-context sameness is current under A.6.9 |
| ontology or wording repair | recover the current object and only the adjacent relations needed to resolve the wording | the repair has not yet recovered a unique current object and subject pattern |
In recognition text, prefer the readable direct relation sentence. Put the reusable declaration, occurrence-identity rule, naming settlement, or representation correspondence in nearby Tech or assurance text governed by its direct pattern, and refer to it when another declared use depends on it. Precision comes from recoverable subject patterns and explicit relations between adjacent objects, not from repeating the complete architecture.
This rule keeps elaboration additive. Each new receiving use introduces only the object on which that use depends and the object’s direct relation to an already recoverable object. When the use stops at the world-side relation, the prose adds no signature, occurrence-description, naming, or representation apparatus.
A.6.REL:4.2 - Apply the receiving-use test
Here receiving use is ordinary wording. First state the readable relation and ask what later work must distinguish. If occurrence identity is needed, name the exact receiving object: an assertion or description episteme under C.2.1, a direct relation that uses the occurrence as a world-side participant, or an assertion episteme stating that one already identified operation application binds the occurrence as the actual value of a named A.6.1 argument. Any acting system, enacted method, and performed work remain separately governed.
- Name the direct relation kind and participants in a readable sentence. Use only the direct relation-participant meanings, obtaining predicate, and applicability needed to state that sentence accurately; do not yet require a
RelationSignature, SlotSpecs, occurrence designator, representation correspondence, or the complete occurrence-identity rule. - Immediately ask: Will later work need to tell this occurrence from another occurrence of the same relation, including another episode with the same participants?
- Apply the observable contrast. A current report that only says
Robot-7 is assigned as inspector through InspectionAssignment-17answers no. A history or comparison that must distinguish a second occurrence of the same direct species from the first, despite the same participant values, answers yes. - If no, keep the readable direct sentence and stop this pattern. Do not create a relation-occurrence description episteme for completeness.
- If yes, recover the participant meanings, applicability, and obtaining predicate from the subject pattern. Inspect the relevant world facts or constituting history in the current case and judge whether they satisfy that test. Only when the current-case facts satisfy the predicate is there an obtaining occurrence to individuate. Otherwise keep the result as a
C.2.1claim under the exact direct predicate; useA.6.Ponly while the predicate or participants remain unclear. A claim-bearing episteme records the exact claim family and polarity; evidence and reliance stay with their direct governors. - Recover and apply the subject pattern’s same-versus-new-occurrence rule. Explicitly individuate one occurrence; assign an identifier only when stable reference is needed.
- Only now name the exact receiving object and subject pattern. Designate the occurrence in a receiving assertion or description episteme; for a receiving direct relation, verify its obtaining with that occurrence as a participant; or, for an already identified operation application, verify the named A.6.1
ArgumentDeclaration, designation rule, ValueKind, cardinality, and binding predicate before an assertion episteme states that the occurrence is its actual bound argument value.
Occurrence existence depends on the direct relation obtaining. Reidentification and distinction from another occurrence depend on the direct identity rule. Explicit individuation depends on a named receiving use. Identifier assignment and reference use depend on an already recoverable occurrence. None of the later moves makes the earlier relation obtain.
A.6.REL:4.3 - Select an identity rule that survives repetition
Use participant-determined identity only when the direct ontology establishes that two distinct occurrences of this relation kind cannot have the same participant identities. The RelationSignature SlotSpecs declare how assertion or description episteme content designates those participants. SlotKinds identify declaration components; database-row and representation keys identify representation elements. Neither function supplies the world-side occurrence-identity rule; apply any constitutive-participant contribution declared by that rule.
When the same participants can enter more than one occurrence, the direct pattern declares the discriminator that exists in that domain:
| Occurrence-identity condition | Direct identity contribution |
|---|---|
| One occurrence is determined by its participants | the direct relation kind and identities of the actual participants jointly determine occurrence identity |
| The same participants stand in the relation during separate episodes | participant identities together with the maximal continuous obtaining interval or another declared episode boundary determine occurrence identity |
| Performed constituting work creates a new occurrence | participant identities together with the constituting work occurrence determine occurrence identity |
| A transformation occurrence rather than its producing work contributes to identity | participant identities together with that transformation occurrence determine occurrence identity, but only when the direct transformation and relation patterns include it in the relation occurrence-identity rule |
| The relation kind uses another domain identity rule | the exact discriminator supplied by its subject pattern |
When a relation occurrence is a constructed result under its direct construction rule, recover each exact constructing U.System through A.13 and let A.15.1 independently admit the performed construction Work. Add F.6 only when the occurrence-identity explanation or a later receiving claim expressly consumes precise assignment-bound attribution through the same obtaining A.13 assignment; F.6 establishes that Work-assignment link and identifies neither the assignment nor the performer. A short explanation may omit an unused assignment identifier, and missing or failed F.6 leaves the construction Work intact. Also recover the enacted constructor Method, input entities, and the identity contribution of that Work occurrence. An installed-part relation is only a hypothetical candidate here: installation Work may distinguish its occurrences only after an accepted pattern for that relation declares the participant meanings, obtaining predicate, applicability, and constitutive identity contribution. Until then, do not infer an installed-part occurrence from the Work, row, drawing, assertion, designation, or representation.
A changed episteme contributes to occurrence identity only when that episteme itself is a constitutive participant under the direct identity rule. A changed publication occurrence contributes only when that publication occurrence is itself a constitutive participant under the same rule. A system merely learning about the relation, describing it, or publishing an episteme about it changes no world-side occurrence.
A.6.REL:4.4 - Separate occurrence, assertion, reifier, relator, description, and publication
A relational assertion is an episteme whose content affirms or denies the direct obtaining predicate for the designated participants. Keep forecasts, scenarios, counterfactuals, permissions, and other claim families under their exact direct governors. Record supported, refuted, or unresolved reliance separately under A.10 or the receiving evaluation. The assertion and its reliance posture can be revised or superseded while the world-side relation remains unchanged.
A reifier is a representation-side term or node. A system may use it to represent statements about a proposition, assertion episteme, or relation-occurrence description episteme. Its presence does not make the direct relation obtain and is not a world-side occurrence-identity rule.
A direct material-relation ontology may identify a relator: a dependent material truth-maker through which its participants stand in the relation. Introduce one only when that ontology identifies the relator, its dependence relations to the participants, and its occurrence-identity rule. Do not generalize that relator to relation kinds whose direct ontology does not provide those three settlements.
An episteme can describe a relation occurrence. A second episteme can describe the first episteme. Under a publication-relation occurrence, a selected episteme edition is available to the declared audience and use. If an information carrier is current, E.17 governs its publication-kit use and E.24.PUB governs publication; carrier identity replaces neither episteme identity nor relation-occurrence identity. None of these objects replaces the direct occurrence-identity rule.
A.6.REL:4.5 - Use one relation occurrence as a participant of another
Before one relation occurrence participates in another relation, explicitly individuate the first occurrence under its direct identity rule. The receiving direct pattern states a participant meaning whose ValueKind admits U.Relation or the exact relation kind; its RelationSignature episteme declares the corresponding SlotSpec. In the world-side receiving occurrence, the first occurrence itself is the participant. A participant designation in the receiving assertion or description episteme denotes it by value or through the RefKind declared by that SlotSpec.
This is ordinary typed participation, not a relation-of-relations exception. The first occurrence keeps its kind, participants, obtaining condition, and identity. The receiving relation keeps its participant meanings, obtaining condition, and identity rule; the receiving RelationSignature keeps its SlotSpecs. The reference used by an assertion belongs to neither world-side occurrence.
A.6.REL:4.6 - Keep ordinary relation use lightweight
The direct relation pattern states the shared participant meanings, obtaining predicate, applicability, and identity rule once; later uses cite only what their branch consumes.
The alternatives below show semantic dependencies within demand-driven progressive elaboration. They share one readable direct relation. The receiving occurrence branch follows a positive distinguishability decision and the direct identity rule, while the RelationSignature branch remains independent and opens only for typed reuse.
readable direct relation sentence with named participants
+-- later work only reports the current relation -> stop
+-- later work must distinguish another occurrence, even with the same participants
+-- check direct obtaining and apply the direct same-versus-new-occurrence rule
+-- then add only the receiving branch that consumes the distinguished occurrence
+-- description or assertion designation
+-- identifier or stable reference
+-- occurrence as another direct relation's participant
+-- occurrence as a declared operation argument
+-- RelationSignature and SlotSpecs independently, only when typed reuse matters
This diagram shows the stop decision and optional increases in explicitness. Its indentation records one dependency: description, identifier assignment, occurrence participation, and later designation require a recoverable occurrence after the same-versus-new-occurrence rule.
A.6.REL:4.7 - Keep world-side change separate from episteme editions
Whenever current wording or work says that a relation occurrence, claim, reusable declaration, name, reference, description, or publication “changed,” first name which exact object changed and apply that object’s own continuity, identity, revision, or edition rule. This selection does not require an A.10 evidence relation:
| Changed object | Exact move |
|---|---|
| direct relation occurrence | apply the direct identity rule to the current case facts or constituting history and determine continuation, cessation, split, or another occurrence; for a temporally extended occurrence, use only the temporal boundary declared by that rule |
| relational assertion | revise, retract, replace, or supersede the assertion episteme under C.2.1 |
RelationSignature | revise the reusable declaration and establish its edition relation under A.6.0 |
| identifier assignment | assign, retire, or replace the designator under F.18 |
| reference use in an episteme | reinterpret or retarget the designation under F.18 and the receiving SlotSpec |
| description episteme | revise the episteme or establish another edition under C.2.1 |
| publication occurrence | end the current publication occurrence or establish another under E.17 and E.24.PUB |
A relation occurrence has identity under its direct rule; a temporally extended occurrence also has temporal history under that rule. Revising an episteme about an occurrence does not by itself establish a change in that occurrence. Check whether the changed episteme or performed Work is constitutive under the direct rule. Current case facts or constituting history must separately satisfy the direct continuation, cessation, or same-versus-new-occurrence rule. Another edition of an assertion, signature, or description episteme, or another publication occurrence, therefore does not by itself entail a new relation occurrence.
Use A.10 only for a separate evidence-based reliance question. Determine world-side continuation, cessation, or a new occurrence from current-case facts or constituting history under the direct identity rule.