C.30.P:4 - Solution

Repair architecture or structure wording by producing an architecture-structure repair note or an equivalent local rewrite.

Minimum fields:

ArchitectureOrStructureRepairNote:
  triggerSpan:
  boundedTextSpanOrPublicationUnit:
  encounteredFPFKindOrReference:
  candidateClaimUses:
  selectedClaimUse:
  sourcePublicationRelationSet?:
  relationClaimSlice?:
  functionOrFunctionalityClaim?:
  structureKindOrArchitectureQuestion?:
  characteristicOrQualityClaimSlice?:
  mathLensClaimSlice?:
  projectSideClaim?:
  relationFunctionClaimRef:
  repairedWordingOrDemotion:
  admissibleUse:
  nonAdmissibleUse:
  remainingReaderUse:
  disposition:

Use the note only when the repair must remain inspectable. A direct local rewrite is enough when one sentence clearly names the selected-structure claim being made, architecture relation, architecture-description use, structural-view use, source-return relation, or subject pattern.

C.30.P:4.1 - Recovery sequence

1. Capture the trigger. Copy the architecture or structure wording and the sentence that uses it.
2. Recover the encountered FPF kind or reference. Decide whether the text points to a selected structure, architecture claim, description, view, diagram, graph, model, dashboard, ADR, source document, carrier, publication, stratification-wording case or source-label case for C.30.STRAT, function, module-interface relation, signature, flow, control, score, quality term, evidence, gate, work, decision, release, or ordinary prose.
3. Recover source-publication relations before architecture assignment. If the wording relies on a source, publication, view, face, PublicationUnit, dashboard, ADR, file, carrier, or source-return relation and a source-use, source-currentness, or publication distinction remains hidden, apply C.2.P before assigning the architecture or structure claim. If that distinction and its subject pattern are already recoverable, use the subject pattern directly.
4. Choose the subject pattern for the architecture or structure use.
   • selected structure -> A.22;
   • ArchitectureOf@Context, selected architecture-relevant structure, or thin conditional ArchitectureDescription@Context bridge use -> C.30;
   • full ArchitectureDescription@Context mechanism -> C.30.AD;
   • architecture structural view -> C.30.ASV;
   • architecture transformation-flow relation -> C.30.TFS-REL;
   • control-structure view -> C.30.LCA;
   • cross-scope conflict or frustration triage -> C.30.ILC;
   • stratification wording or source-label wording such as layer, level, tier, stack, ladder, rung, block, expert, cache, router, or gate -> C.30.STRAT while the label’s technical meaning remains unclear, before choosing the final subject pattern;
   • named C.30 subcase -> that subpattern.
5. Assign non-architecture claims to their subject patterns. If the sentence uses architecture wording to carry relation, function or functionality, mathematical-lens, characteristic and scale, quality, evidence, assurance, gate, work, decision, causal-use, release, or method claim, apply the subject pattern for that claim and keep this pattern only for the architecture or structure wording repair.
6. State admissible and non-admissible use. Say what the reader may do with the repaired wording and what non-admissible adjacent interpretation is blocked.
7. Stop C.30.P after assignment. Stop after the subject pattern or ordinary-prose demotion is named.