C.25:2 - Problem

Without a normal form for engineering quality families:

1. Composite families are scalarized illegally. Terms such as resilience, security, or maintainability are treated as if one number exhausted them.
2. Scope is confused with measurement. A claim’s ClaimScope / WorkScope is spoken of as if it were a magnitude rather than a USM set-valued applicability object.
3. Mechanism and status are mistaken for evidence or metrics. Presence of redundancy, certification, or audit controls is described as if it were itself a measurement value.
4. Guards become unstable. Admission checks silently mix scope coverage, numerical thresholds, mechanism presence, and evidence freshness in one phrase.
5. Evaluative governing-pattern selection remains underspecified. After C.16.Q repairs a bare quality term, or C.16.P repairs characteristic, scale, score, metric, or proxy wording inside that term, the admissible endpoint is unclear unless FPF distinguishes single-CHR cases from bundle-shaped quality families.