E.17.EFP:4.2 - Core profile fields

The ontic first screen is performed once, not copied into a metadata record for every note. Most published forms whose identity branch is already recoverable need only the compact explanation-use note:

The fuller field vocabulary below opens only when ambiguity or load-bearing use is present: different classes across faces, source linkage dispute, connective reconstruction, reader-fit dispute, interaction or statefulness, derivative rendering, cross-context reuse, cited reliance, work or reliance, evidence, gate, engineering justification, bridge, or coarsening boundary.

• faceRuleRef = E.17 and viewpointConformanceRuleRef = E.17.0;
• sourcePublicationOrRecordForm;
• targetPublicationOrRecordForm;
• changeTargetRef;
• entityOfConcernPolicy = preserve for explanation renderings over the same underlying source U.Episteme edition;
• boundedContextPolicy;
• viewpointPolicy;
• referenceSchemePolicy;
• representationSchemePolicy;
• groundingPolicy;
• referencePlanePolicy;
• claimPolicy;
• claimScopePolicy;
• publicationScopePolicy;
• reliabilityTransportPolicy;
• pinningPolicy;
• provenancePolicy;
• lossProfile;
• claimContinuityClass;
• microtheoryContinuityClass;
• onticContinuityClass;
• bridgeRequirement;
• worldContactPolicy;
• evidencePolicy;
• gatePolicy;
• workCrossing;
• sourceRelationRuleRef?, upstreamAuthoritySourceRef?, downstreamUseRuleRef?, and downstreamAuthoritySourceRef?;
• boundedFaces;
• publication-face kind value when publication face/form or interop publication form discipline is present;
• publicNamePolicy;
• explanationSourceRelationClass using the shared E.17:5.1b vocabulary when source pointer, source availability or retrieval, source use, source faithfulness, claim-source relation, contradiction, omission, claim widening, added linkage, independent verification, bounded use, forbidden downstream use, or reopen trigger could diverge;
• no generic source-relation field; source relation is recorded through explanationSourceRelationClass;
• augmentationRelation;
• addedLinkPolicy when a non-obvious SourceLinkedExplanationReconstruction connective points to an actual derivation from the source claims or to an exact relation occurrence that those source claims already report and whose obtaining is independently established;
• targetUserModel? when reader-fit materially shapes the rendering;
• interactionMode? when the explanation is more than one static explanatory paragraph;
• contrastiveQuestion? when the rendering is answering a specific user-facing contrast or why-question;
• boundedReaderUse? when downstream use is bounded by intended reader and task;
• overreadRisk? when overinterpretation pressure is part of the review load;
• evidenceRelation? only when a named operative claim or receiving reliance actually consumes an A.10 evidence/provenance path;
• noNewBoundaryClaims = true on explanation faces;
• compositionRule;
• reopenCondition.

These fields inherit the E.17:5.1e local-field rule. They classify one explanation-facing rendering for review; they do not create U.Kind, publication-face kind, RelationKind, KindBridge, EvidenceKind, GateDecision, SpeechAct, Commitment, U.Work, authority reference, publication face, or project-side FPF kind and reference named by value unless another FPF pattern explicitly defines or instantiates that object. The explanationClass value is a local source-relation and bounded-use profile value, not ExplanationKind, not U.Kind, not EvidenceKind, not FaceKind, and not a truth certificate.

When claim content changes, pause EFP until the practitioner uses C.2.1 to identify the target episteme and the applicable source-to-target pattern to identify and test the relation. EFP may then qualify a publication form of that target only when explanation use remains a distinct question; it never substitutes for that relation or its obtaining test.