ADM.4:10 - Architectural Rationale

The receiving action comes first because it determines which correspondence matters. Subject identity precedes comparison of participant meanings because a viewpoint label cannot establish that two statements concern the same thing. Institutional consequence follows separately because a common event description cannot determine a rule it does not contain.

The serious alternatives are full normalization into one account and leaving every source separate. Normalization can be economical when meanings and authority already match. It loses useful content when participant-relative meanings or decision conditions differ. Separate sources can remain adequate when one action needs only one account; a bounded correspondence is worthwhile when the participants must act together.