fpf.tools
Library / First Principles Framework (FPF) - Core Conceptual Specification
Jump to passage
In this reading
Source · lines 96294–96304

Link to current text

Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-03 08:01:07 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 08:04:31 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 08:15:20 UTC

E.17.ID.CR:4.3.f - Static note versus interactive aid

Use two comparison-relation forms.

  1. Static comparative review note. A static note, sheet, or short review unit normally needs only the reviewed source episteme or source publication set, source references, E.17:5.1b source-relation class when source relation is disputed, comparison criterion, bounded lift, blocked downstream claim or effect, world-contact limit, and boundary trigger. Do not import interactive-explanation vocabulary into this ordinary case.
  2. Interactive comparative aid. Add targetUserModel, interactionMode, state or history needed for the comparison claim, overreadRisk, and bounded-use boundary only when the aid is actually interactive, stateful, adaptive, or user-model-bearing. These fields keep the interactive comparative aid from being mistaken for audience-neutral static prose; they do not carry a crossed claim.

A comparative review unit can expose or cite the source epistemes, source publications, or project-side FPF references being compared, but layout, fluent contrast, side-by-side placement, or guided-review reuse does not change the kind of the unit or create a stronger source relation. If the required source relation is missing, the repair request or source-gap note is prospective only; it does not backdate a source relation into the earlier comparison.

Comparative-review-unit identity over revision. A revised comparison table, regenerated comparison note, or updated guided review aid is not the same bounded comparison merely because the layout, title, or compared-source family stayed familiar. If new source input, revised source references, changed comparison criterion, changed shared review frame, or changed blocked downstream claim or effect changes the comparison identity or downstream use, publish the preserved comparative frame and the changed claims, or treat the result as a new comparative review unit before using it for a stronger crossed claim.