E.10:7.8 - Examples (illustrative, canonical)

For BusinessService wording, use U.PromiseContent when the recovered claim concerns promised content; for Function wording, use A.2.2 to state the qualified holder-ability claim when it concerns a System’s ability; for NaturalProcess wording, use U.Dynamics when it concerns a law of change. Each recovered claim must satisfy its subject pattern. Replace ScheduleProcess with U.WorkPlan only when one episteme passes A.15.2: one present EntityOfConcern, one horizon, at least one PlanItem, and substantive coordination claims about possible future performed work. Otherwise retain the schedule representation, planning cue, or other recovered construction. Do not mint ETLService at kernel level. Recover the ETL claim first: the way of doing may be one U.Method; a separately identified claim-bearing episteme may be U.MethodDescription only when that method is its EntityOfConcern and the A.3.2 substantive-description threshold is met. An ETL label, pipeline diagram, code expression, mechanism, work plan, dated Work occurrence, or API publication establishes neither membership. If a relied-on service use still hides another subject or relation, apply L-SERV and A.6.P:4.11a and name the recovered claim; the suffix alone requires no promise, access, acceptance, Work, or publication branch.