B.3.5:14 - Rationale (informative)

14.1 Why canonical‑first? CT2R-LOG treats the human-readable, task-appropriate relation (e.g., ut:ComponentOf) as the canonical publication form because that is what engineers and managers actually use to reason, decide, and communicate. The formal layers ground that form; they do not replace it. This is consistent with the authoring Standard in Part E (pattern template and style guide), which privileges clarity, purpose and didactics over premature formalism in the body text. Authors write for people first, then point to the kind of assurance they are invoking.

14.2 Why two tv: links—and why concept‑only? tv:AliasOf and tv:groundedBy name conceptual bridges from a public Working-Model relation to its direct principle and assurance account. They mandate no notation. They keep authors explicit about the relation reading, the support being invoked, and when that support must be current, without letting an alias, trace, or mode define the world-side occurrence.

14.3 Why a triad of validationMode? The triad {postulate, inferential, axiomatic} distinguishes permitted justification postures, not stages of formality or increasing confidence. The direct relation kind and elected profile determine which posture and support are appropriate for the receiving claim and use. A sufficient calibration account in a branch permitting postulate needs no mode promotion; an elected structural-parthood or collection-belonging claim still requires its respective current construction trace. Where a load-bearing claim needs stronger proof or an empirical check, select that contribution for the assurance gap it can resolve, not to advance through the three labels. The mode declaration changes neither the canonical relation nor the strength of its support.

14.4 Why recover parthood independently of order and time? Order and temporal coverage answer different questions from parthood. A chronology or diagram supplies no part relation by itself. A.15.1 can independently establish a Work temporal part, and A.14 a proper temporal phase of an unchanged non-Work carrier. Preserve those relations alongside the applicable Method and temporal claims; B.1.4 aggregates only the relations already recovered.

14.5 Why point to Γ_m.sum | set | slice (Compose‑CAL) for constructive grounding? The three C.13 forms—sum, set, slice—are sufficient to report the recurring construction accounts for integrated assemblies, collections, and aspects without expanding the kernel. They are not identity functions. A truthful account carries exact participants, direct relation occurrences, the applicable rule, and identity or reidentification conditions: the same inputs under another assembly can form another whole, while a permitted replacement can preserve one whole.

14.6 Why mental obligations rather than process mandates? Part E requires that patterns define or constrain thinking and authoring; enforcement and automation, if any, are external concerns. CT2R-LOG therefore states obligations as self-contained cognitive checks: for a claim within an elected profile, declare a permitted mode and supply the support required by that branch; use the respective current trace for structural parthood or collection belonging; keep order/time in their places. The requirements concern the claim’s justification, not attainment of an axiomatic strength level. This keeps the core specification evergreen and tool-agnostic, as required.