C.30:4.6 - Relation to structural views

Use C.30.ASV to test structural-view adequacy for an exact architecture-description episteme about one selected structure. E.17.0 separately admits that same episteme as U.View through independently obtaining conformance to an exact viewpoint. C.30 defines direct ArchitectureRelation occurrences, bounded ArchitectureClaim content, and, only for durable description use, how its thin ArchitectureDescription bridge cites exact structural views. Hidden or lost structure, correspondence, source or reliance relations, and source-return boundaries stay explicit when they affect action. C.30.AD defines the full description mechanism.

A diagram, model, table, selected transformation-flow diagram, mathematical graph description, LCA diagram, C.29 lens output, ADR, dashboard, generated explanation, or other publication face may carry an architecture description or an architecture structural view. It does not become the architecture, and it does not become a conforming view only because it looks like a view.

Use AffectedArchitectureStructureNote when the next architecture move needs to name affected structures or view losses without using an architecture decision, ADR, gate, evidence, assurance, or release record:

AffectedArchitectureStructureNote:
  architectureClaimRef:
  affectedStructureKindRefs:
  affectedStructureRefs?:
  affectedArchitectureStructuralViewRefs?:
  acceptedOrSuspectedViewLoss?:
  sourceReturnCondition?:
  nextAdmissibleUse:

This note only names affected architecture structure for the next architecture use. For a separate decision, ADR-publication, gate-passage, evidence-sufficiency, or release-authorization question, use the pattern that defines or tests that object or claim.