E.11.PUA:4.2.1 - Admitted support species and rule-content locators

PracticalUseQuestion@Context <: U.Episteme
PatternUseResultExpectation@Context <: U.Episteme
PatternUseResultClosureFinding@Context <: U.Episteme
PatternUseReceivingUseDispositionFinding@Context <: U.Episteme
PatternUseBoundaryCondition@Context <: U.Episteme
CandidatePatternUseRationale@Context <: U.Episteme
PatternUseCoordinationRationale@Context <: U.Episteme
PracticalUseCardComparisonRationale@Context <: U.Episteme
PatternUseFitFinding@Context <: U.Episteme
CandidatePatternUse@Context <: U.Episteme
PatternUseApplicabilityFinding@Context <: U.Episteme

@Context in these legacy support-species names is a compatibility and retrieval suffix. It names no U.BoundedContext, universal situation, project container, relation, or identity field. Every support episteme follows C.2.1 identity. Claim scope, bounded model use, project work, qualification window, and other working conditions enter only through the exact neighboring object and direct relation needed by the receiving use.

The defining ClaimGraph located at PUA states the practical-question, optional compact-trace, candidate-basis, candidate-support-episteme, candidate-rationale, result-expectation, result-closure-finding, and dependent-use-disposition-finding schemas. The exact rule content at E.11 states public-card comparison rationale; E.11.PUR states fit, applicability, recommendation, coordination rationale, coordination, and ordering. A candidate basis is an ordinary C.2.1 claim about the exact candidate when that addressable account is needed. It cites actual supporting claims, independently obtaining relations or evidence uses under their own definitions. It introduces no generic candidate-basis or additional-basis U.Relation. PUR separately governs prospective coordination and precedence. Its result-dependent readiness claim consumes a current PUA closure, including an adequate earlier result; the prospective ordering relation itself does not require that result already to exist. PUA findings cite the result predicate, defining or constraining ClaimGraph, pattern locator, and one category-correct direct basis. In the local-claim branch they keep the A.6.RCD derivation-rule locator distinct from every base-predicate ClaimGraph locator. They introduce no result or actual-use relation kind.