E.17.2:9 - Conformance checklist

1. The pattern is used as an authoring template until one project supplies exact <G_L, K_L, R_L>, ordinary f_eng, four exact r_* : U.ViewpointRef values, four exact P targets, and their resolution path; labels or variable names fill none of those positions.
2. Exact G_L contains one local declaration claim block with the four bound references; it is not an inferred bundle U-kind, separate bundle entity, embedded viewpoint value, view, document, form, carrier, or publication occurrence.
3. Each reader-facing viewpoint name is only the project-local designator of exact P; designator, reference, P, any structured-branch S, and declaration position remain distinct.
4. Each P passes all five E.17.0 viewpoint-membership conditions. It uses the self-contained branch by default; an exact C/Q/S witness is required only when separately versioned convention organization changes a named action.
5. In a triggered structured branch, each witness names exact least-powerful constituent editions, every selected obtaining dependency occurrence, ordinary Q_org, exact A.22-selected S, and ordinary P; optional dependency-use decisions and evaluations remain named-use neighbors.
6. Each concern episteme has one independently recoverable EntityOfConcern. Every relation claim names its exact predicate, participants, obtaining test, and applicable pattern; a multi-subject phrase is split or retained as a constraint claim, never promoted to a hidden group kind.
7. Candidate E has one exact holon H as EntityOfConcern and becomes U.View only through obtaining EpistemeViewpointConformanceRelation(E,P).
8. A singular describing-use reference selects P without entering E/P identity or conformance; A.6.3 construction, declaration membership, naming, evaluation, rendering, and publication grant no membership.
9. Every procedural failure or recovery claim has an exact operational subject and admitted Method, state-transition, or transformation-flow basis. A safety-analysis episteme or A.10 evidence path appears only for a safety-bearing claim or named reliance. Within that branch, use B.3 only when an actual named assurance claim for that use is current. Procedural views remain distinct from MethodDescriptions and Work; allocation-responsibility views keep the local system-role kind, any four-input C.3.2 classification judgment, optional extension, assignment, performer System, and responsibility relation distinct; module-interface views remain distinct from direct module relations or functional views.
10. DDD Context Mapping remains a U.Method; a product called Context Map is a separately identified episteme and becomes a View only through exact E/P conformance.
11. Every cross-view relation names its exact predicate, participants, obtaining test, and applicable pattern; a diagram edge, correspondence label, citation, shared holon, or common template is insufficient.
12. Form expression, carrier bearing, five-participant publication and recurrence, rendering work, C.29 representation, and any publication-side viewpoint remain distinct and make no represented world-side relation obtain.
13. Cross-project reuse is claimed only for the same resolved L, declaration, and exact member references. Equal TEVB position labels or independently filled templates establish no shared family.
14. Later ordinary reuse resolves the admitted L and declaration, then one needed P, and stops after the readable conformance judgment unless a named receiving work needs more structure. It reopens full catalogue constitution only under the E.17.1:4.2 triggers.