E.17.0:4.6.2 - Add a viewpoint-convention structure only when it changes action

Use the structured branch only when at least two convention components remain independently identified or versioned and their obtaining dependencies or organization change a named reuse, comparison, maintenance, or joint-interpretation action. Mere decomposition, citation, co-membership, a graph, or future possibility is insufficient.

Construct C_viewpoint under C.13 from the exact constituent episteme editions. The collection may be heterogeneous: its invariant is exact constituent identity, not uniform declaration power. Give each constituent the least-powerful independently admitted kind that carries its actual claims.

Constituent	Admit it when	Exact subject and practical job	Do not collapse it with
`E_target`	A target-kind criterion is current.	One C.2.1 episteme whose exact EntityOfConcern is the admitted target kind and whose claims cite the direct identity and membership rule. For a local target, those claims state which candidates it can classify, what intended members must satisfy, what separates relevant non-members, and when a changed declaration still describes the same kind. A practice or source boundary only helps find or compare that membership rule. An exact C.3.2 `KindSignature` edition and `U.ContextSlice` remain separate test inputs when the receiving membership judgment needs them. Use another `U.Signature` only when the criterion is itself a reused declaration with vocabulary, laws, and applicability.	a raw kind reference, target mention as membership proof, a local KindSignature or ContextSlice substituted for the target kind, or a wrapper Signature around a local declaration
`E_stakeholder.system[i]`	The concern names one stakeholder system.	One C.2.1 episteme whose exact EntityOfConcern is the independently admitted exact `U.System`.	system mention, stakeholder-family typing, a current system-role assignment, or the episteme substituted for the System
`E_stakeholder.systemRoleKind[i]`	The concern addresses Systems classified under one exact local system-role kind.	One C.2.1 episteme whose exact EntityOfConcern is that local `U.Kind`; its claims state which admitted Systems are candidates, what work-facing condition intended members must satisfy, what separates relevant non-members, and when a changed declaration still describes the same kind. A practice or source boundary only helps find or compare that membership rule. They may cite the current `KindSignature` edition and `U.ContextSlice` as separate classification-test inputs when the receiving use needs them. A reusable reference field ends in `...SystemRoleKindRef` and is typed by `U.KindRef`. Classification judgments and actual assignments remain separate.	bare role spelling, `KindSignature`, classification judgment, holder reference, assignment occurrence, or responsibility
`E_stakeholder.systemRoleAssignment[i]`	One exact obtaining assignment occurrence changes the concern.	One C.2.1 episteme whose exact EntityOfConcern is that occurrence under a directly declared species of `U.SystemRoleAssignment`. A reusable reference field ends in `...SystemRoleAssignmentRef` and is typed by `U.RelationRef constrained to U.SystemRoleAssignment`.	local kind, holder System, assertion or description of the assignment, assignment spelling, or responsibility
`E_stakeholder.collection[i]`	Several exact Systems jointly form the concern referent.	One C.2.1 episteme whose exact EntityOfConcern is the independently identified C.13 collection-as-whole.	list adjacency, one System, local system-role kind or assignment, the member plurality, or a description substituted for the collection whole
`E_stakeholder.localKind[i]`	The concern quantifies over one exact local kind.	One C.2.1 episteme whose exact EntityOfConcern is the independently admitted local kind. Its claims state which candidates it can classify, what intended members must satisfy, what separates relevant non-members, and when a changed declaration still describes the same kind. A practice or source boundary only helps find or compare that membership rule. An exact C.3.2 `KindSignature` edition and `U.ContextSlice` remain separate inputs only when a classification judgment is current. If the concern later relates this kind to another exact local kind, ask the C.3.3 relation question separately.	a wrapper Signature, raw class spelling, KindSignature or ContextSlice substituted for the kind, silent public-kind promotion, or a local extension treated as universal
`E_concern[i]`	One exact question or concern claim is needed.	Ordinarily one C.2.1 episteme about one independently identified entity. It states what a conforming episteme must address. Promote it to `U.Signature` only when the concern predicate itself is a reused declaration with vocabulary, laws, and applicability.	a public `U.Concern`, unresolved EntityOfConcern, one-use question inflated into a Signature, or a concern label
`E_admittedKind[i]`	One independently admitted episteme kind may enter conformance.	One C.2.1 episteme that cites the exact kind and the rule that admits its members; an exact local `KindSignature` may itself be the constituent.	a raw label or reference, admission by citation, a local wrapper, circular `U.View` admission, or the reference substituted for the membership rule
`E_rule[i]`	A construction, interpretation, coverage, semantic-form, completeness, consistency, or omission constraint is current.	Ordinarily one C.2.1 episteme stating the constraint about its exact EntityOfConcern. Use `U.Signature` only for genuinely reusable declaration content with vocabulary, laws, and applicability; use `U.MethodDescription` only when the claims describe one independently admitted method as a way of doing.	every rule coerced to Signature, procedural appearance as method-description admission, missing exact subject, or one-use constraint inflated with declaration fields
`D_method[i]`	A method-based convention is actually current.	One A.3.2 `U.MethodDescription` whose exact EntityOfConcern `M_method[i]` independently passes A.3.1. The description supplies the convention; the raw method stays outside `C_viewpoint`.	method mention as membership, raw method as constituent, several descriptions inferred to form one workflow, or description as performed work

Preserve every exact edition. A concern question, kind citation, or one-use rule acquires none of SubjectKind, RangedValueKind, Vocabulary, Laws, or Applicability merely to fit a common table. Conversely, a constituent that independently is a reusable relation declaration, kind declaration, or method description keeps that stronger admitted kind. Collection position grants no convention job and no stronger membership.

For this branch:

identify the least-powerful exact constituents above;
construct exact C_viewpoint from those editions under C.13;
recover each selected direct relation occurrence using the pattern that defines its obtaining test and occurrence identity;
identify ordinary constraint episteme Q_org about exact C_viewpoint and the admissible describing-use frame;
have an exact system use the applicable A.22 selection method over C, selected obtaining occurrences, applied Q constraints, and the use frame, yielding exact S_viewpoint; and
constitute P under C.2.1 with EntityOfConcern(P)=S_viewpoint and the same five fixed claim-content conditions from §4.6.1.

In this branch, changed P claim content, exact S, or effective scheme identifies another P edition. S itself is not U.Viewpoint; P is the claim-bearing individual. No viewpoint record, wrapper, organization object, context entity, bundle position, package ID, publication grouping, or parent U.Signature grants membership. When the action-changing trigger disappears, use or author self-contained P rather than preserving C/Q/S as ceremonial structure.