fpf.tools
Library / First Principles Framework (FPF) - Core Conceptual Specification
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 11635–11656

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 17:24:51 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 17:30:20 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 18:00:10 UTC

A.6:4.4 - “Contract” unpacking: avoid assigning agency to epistemes

When “the API contract” leaves a consequential ambiguity, use A.6.C to ask only the live questions: what was promised, what was said or instituted, what governance position obtains, and what actually happened. Use A.15.1:4.6 to separate any dated Work from the result, production, delivery/transfer, evidence, or acceptance claims actually made. Clear wording, including a semantic guarantee or recoverable ordinary metonymy, needs no unpacking record.

  • Promise content (promise content; U.PromiseContent, A.2.3): what is promised to be made available to eligible consumers — a promise, not execution (U.Work).
  • Utterance package (published descriptions + instituting act): what is said and published and versioned (signature or mechanism descriptions plus MVPK faces), plus the U.SpeechAct <: U.Work that published or approved it when provenance matters (A.2.9).
  • Commitment (individual deontic relation; U.Commitment, A.2.8): whether one actual admitted System or other party is obligated, recommended-as-duty, or prohibited from doing something under an exact constitutive rule and required instituting basis. A system-role kind or assignment may help satisfy that rule’s applicability conditions; neither is the duty bearer or the commitment relation. A commitment does not establish responsibility, which needs its own direct domain predicate or an exact missing-governor result.
  • Permission-looking claim: do not make Permission a bundle part or quadrant. Select one A6-AW-* row for each atomic claim and cite its direct object.
  • Performed Work (A.15.1): whether one dated Work occurrence happened, who performed it, which Method it enacted, when it happened, and within which System. Recover each exact performer through A.13 and admit the Work independently through A.15.1. Only when the receiving account expressly consumes precise assignment-bound attribution, recover the exact A.2.1 assignment independently and let F.6 check its link to the Work through the same obtaining A.13 assignment; F.6 identifies neither assignment nor performer, and a failed or absent result does not revoke Work. This claim supplies no result, delivery, or acceptance by itself.
  • Result or consequence (A.15.1:4.6 dispatch): only when current, name the exact A.6.1 application/result binding or subject-specific WorkResultRelation, A.15.PROD production branch, A.3.4 change, evaluation result, delivery/transfer relation, or acceptance relation.
  • Evidence (A.10): only when a receiving use relies on one of those claims, name the claim-bound evidence path and carrier.

In A.6 terms:

  • The signature is the utterance substrate for the boundary; it is not itself a promiser or obligor (A.7).
  • Deontic claims use A.2.8 for generic prescriptions or separately obtaining individual duties and commitments, and A6-AW-NORM-GRANT for the current norm/grant branch. Other permission-looking claims keep the placement and object named by their selected row.
  • Classify each atomic operational “guarantee” claim as L (truth-conditional law), A (entry predicate), D (generic prescription, individual commitment, or current grant), or E (actual exercise, evaluated result, work effect, or measured property with evidence).

Compact optional-object replay. SVC-DEPLOY-1 states promise content. Admitted system ReleaseManager-4 performs SA-4711 : U.SpeechAct under ReleaseManager-4@ReleaseShift; the exact policy may institute COM-4711 : U.Commitment or PER-4711 : GrantedPermissionRelation@Context. Later admitted system Operator-7 performs DeployRun-4711 : U.Work under its covering assignment. If the application returns ReleaseArtifact-4711, cite the exact A.6.1 result binding or an already governed WorkResultRelation; if that artifact is delivered, cite a separately obtaining transfer relation defined by its subject pattern; if acceptance is claimed, cite the criterion, evaluation Work/result, and acceptance relation. An A.10 path may support whichever one of those claims is relied on. Omit every absent object: the Work can occur without a result, delivery, acceptance, or evidence-use claim.

Use A.6.C — Contract Unpacking for Boundaries for the expanded account and the same A.15.1:4.6 dispatch.