C.25:14 - Slot Interaction Law

The practical payoff of C.25 is not just that it names the slots. It also stabilizes how those slots interact.

C.25:14.1 - Scope and measure remain orthogonal

ClaimScope answers where or under what contextual slice the quality claim holds; WorkScope answers where the capability’s deliverability claim may be evaluated. Measures[CHR] answer how a measurable aspect behaves. A broader scope is not a larger measurement value; a narrower scope is not a penalty value. Scope is governed by set inclusion and coverage, not by scalar order.

C.25:14.2 - Mechanism and status are gating slots

Mechanisms and statuses may be load-bearing for admissibility, but they do not become measurements merely because they matter. A redundancy mechanism may be required for claiming a resilience bundle, and a certification status may be required for external publication, yet neither slot is itself the Measures[CHR] head.

This matters because many quality arguments fail by turning mechanism presence into an implicit hidden score.

C.25:14.3 - Qualification windows are not decorative

A quality claim that depends on rolling windows, observation periods, maintenance intervals, or disruption horizons must publish that temporal qualifier explicitly. If the truth of the quality claim changes when the window changes, then the window is part of the declared bundle record rather than optional commentary.

C.25:14.4 - Report-only summary proxies

A publisher may compute a report-only summary proxy for convenience, for example a compact quality summary value or an oversight-facing composite score. State in claim content which exact Q-Bundle slots the proxy summarizes and what it leaves out. The proxy may be another Characteristic or claim under its direct pattern, but it does not replace the source quality-claim episteme or its addressed claims in a norm, gate, comparison, or cross-context use.