B.3.5:11 - Conformance Checklist (normative, author-facing)

The following obligations regulate how to think and write CT2R content. They are notation‑agnostic and purely conceptual.

ID	Requirement	Purpose
CC-CT2R-1 (Canonical-first).	A relation published for readers SHALL be stated in Working-Model terms (`ut:Of`) as the canonical form; any constructive or logical justification is recorded as grounding* (not as the definition).	Preserve human-first canon and didactic primacy.
CC‑CT2R‑2 (Mode declaration).	For every relation or rule covered by an elected B.3.5 profile, the author SHALL declare `tv:validationMode ∈ {postulate, inferential, axiomatic}` in prose. A direct relation outside the profile needs no B.3.5 mode.	Make elected assurance intent explicit without taxing ordinary direct use.
CC‑CT2R‑3 (Structural axiomatic grounding).	A covered structural parthood assertion uses `validationMode=axiomatic` and links to its applicable current C.2.1 `sum` or `slice` construction trace. The account reports independently grounded participants, occurrences, rule, and identity conditions; it creates none.	Make elected structural assurance inspectable without turning it into a truth-maker.
CC‑CT2R‑4 (No parthood from order/time alone).	Authors SHALL NOT infer parthood from sequence, parallelism or temporal slicing alone. Any Work-part or proper-phase claim satisfies A.15.1 or A.14 independently; Method order and temporal relations use their direct patterns.	Preserve distinct relation meanings while allowing independently established temporal parts.
CC‑CT2R‑5 (Collection vs part).	Authors keep collection belonging under the collection’s own rule distinct from every `PartOf` branch. A direct claim needs no profile fields; after B.3.5 election it uses `validationMode=axiomatic` and one current `C.13 set` trace. If constructive parthood also obtains, state and support that claim separately.	Prevent category errors without taxing ordinary belongs-to prose or prohibiting a stronger independently grounded claim.
CC‑CT2R‑5a (Set trace reports).	The elected set trace names the collection, the entity said to belong, the already established occurrence, the collection’s own belongs-to rule, and the identity conditions. It creates none of them and supplies no structural-composition reliability.	Keeps optional assurance from becoming ontology.
CC‑CT2R‑6 (Fit is explicit).	Where a claim relies on a mapping or alignment, the author SHALL state its actual applicability, preserved/lost distinctions and consequence for this claim. Any quantitative reliability adjustment needs a justified receiving model, compatible Scale and calculation; a CL label alone supplies none.	Keep integration limits inspectable without invented reliability arithmetic.
CC‑CT2R‑7 (Notational independence).	Core meaning MUST NOT hinge on any specific diagram or syntax; illustrative renderings, if present, are labelled informative.	Ensure longevity and cross‑discipline portability.
CC‑CT2R‑8 (Layer direction).	Grounding flows downwards from Working‑Model to Assurance layers (Mapping/Logical/Constructive). Authors SHALL avoid back‑defining the canonical relation by its Mapping, Logical, Constructive, or Empirical grounding.	Preserve unidirectional dependence of layers.
CC‑CT2R‑9 (Scope split).	When assurance is discussed, authors SHALL state the typed claim and scope `S ∈ {design, run}` and keep them distinct in reasoning.	Prevent DesignRunTag chimeras.