C.22.2:14 - Source and P2W Carry-Forward
Apply the following source details as constraints on C.22.2 use and its P2W-facing input.
| Source detail | Current FPF recovery | C.22.2 carry-forward relation |
|---|---|---|
| Source examples: person, team, organization, System, community, episteme, and exact Work | Recognition material for the EntityOfConcern or exact A.15.6 Work when it changes problem-card use; not a new FPF kind taxonomy | A domain or practice locus may qualify the effective ReferenceScheme, ClaimScope, horizon, indicators, cost of error, the exact system-role kind or assignment, participation, viewpoint, or comparison, but it neither constitutes the card nor identifies an actual Problem. |
| Engineering language for reproducibility and management language for coordination, rights, resources, and responsibility | Verification and reproducibility, coordination, right, resource, system-role classification or assignment, participation, and responsibility claims are different FPF relations | C.22.2 may retain bare role only as an E.10.ROLE cue; any exact kind, assignment, participation, budget, right, or responsibility field or relation reference follows its direct pattern. Claims outside the problem-side record stay there. |
| Problem factory, solution factory, and factory-of-factories | Source exposition for three related work families, not FPF process kinds | C.22.2 covers only the problem-side output. Solution and P2W relations use G.5, A.15, E.18, A.10, G.6, B.3, A.21, E.16, and G.11; organizational-development or platform-capability questions are outside this pattern. |
| Characterization protocol: ReferenceScheme, ClaimScope or slice, compared set, exact system-role-kind, assignment, participation, or viewpoint qualification, scale, polarity, measurement Method, freshness, repeatability, budget, missing data, and comparison rules | C.16, A.19, C.25, G.9, and the exact qualification pattern | ProblemCard cites characterization, qualification, and comparability relations when current; available measurement or a visible label alone is not an accepted use relation. |
| Indicator uses: mandatory constraints, optimization objectives for the current cycle, and risk signals | Characteristic and Q-bundle use under selected comparison or acceptance | C.22.2 preserves whether an indicator is used as a mandatory constraint, optimization objective, or monitored risk signal when that distinction affects acceptance; the use is not a system-role kind or assignment. |
| Problem portfolio as a period-bounded selected set with budget, assignment or participation cue, review cadence, and not-selected disposition | G.5, C.19, G.9, G.11, A.6.P:7a, C.16.Q, and E.10.ROLE when bare role is the source cue | ProblemCard preserves the source set or reference, selection or retention criterion, budget or window, review cadence, and not-selected or stepping-stone disposition. If an actual System, local system-role kind, assignment, participation, or responsibility relation matters, cite that independently obtaining direct claim rather than the portfolio wording. |
| Goldilocks as zone-of-growth selection calibrated to current capability, effective ReferenceScheme, and ClaimScope | Problem-side entry to current NQD, OEE, and set-return family | C.22.2 does not turn Goldilocks into one global difficulty scale or scalar readiness score. |
| Stepping stones as option value: new actions, tools, data, interfaces, environments, or experiment modes that may expand downstream search | Retained archive, front, or pool member, or selected-set reason | C.22.2 may record stepping-stone value only with a governing set-return, archive, or pool pattern and a retention or tie-break criterion. |
| P2W chain: signatures and principles help select formalism, ontology, characterization, and method-family material | A.6.0, A.6.1, C.16, A.19, C.29, G.5, and E.18 | C.22.2 supplies problem-side cues and relation references; it does not select the formalism, ontology, mechanism, or method family by itself. |
| P2W chain: condition measurement and comparison help select a concrete method | C.16, A.19, C.25, G.9, G.5, and A.15 | State the comparison-and-acceptance cue or acceptance-criterion reference and parity and characterization relations needed by downstream method selection. |
| P2W chain: work planning makes planned work inspectable | A.15.2 and A.15.3 | C.22.2 may supply problem-side input for TaskSignature preparation and assignment under C.22; the identifiable plan is one exact U.WorkPlan, and any planned-filling row remains declaration-local content addressed through that plan. |
| P2W chain: performed work produces work-result records | A.15, A.10, G.6, and B.3 | C.22.2 does not treat performed work or result records as problem-card fields beyond problem-side cues or named relation references. |
| P2W chain: result measurement can trigger refresh or return to earlier source material | C.16, G.11, A.10, G.6, B.3, C.18, and C.19 | C.22.2 states freshness or expiry and unknown-handling dispositions that let downstream result measurement refresh, retire, or re-open the problem-side record. |
| Runbook, rollback plan, canary, SafeStop, error budget, and override protocol | Work, gate, autonomy, evidence, and control records | These source forms are not C.22.2 subobjects; apply A.15, A.21, E.16, A.10, G.6, or B.3 when the corresponding claim is current. |
| Trust debt after reliance-window expiry | Freshness and decay indicator and bounded-risk continuation question | Treat trust debt as an indicator or problem-formulation follow-up reason, not as punishment, proof failure, or gate passage by itself. |
C.22.2 remains the problem-side output. P2W carries its problem-side cues and, when current, exact receiving-use and Work references into method-family selection, work planning, performed-work interpretation, and result measurement.