E.9:10 - Rationale

FPF evolves through explicit, reviewable decisions rather than silent edits. The DRR is the minimum structured argument and, when several loci must move together, a temporary convergence record. This keeps P-10 Open-Ended Evolution compatible with P-1 Cognitive Elegance and P-2 Didactic Primacy. Exact method, work, result, episteme, assessment, and authority distinctions remain available when a current claim depends on them; they do not precede or replace the readable decision. E.9 sets a floor, not a ceiling: every nontrivial conforming DRR must make Problem‑frame / Decision / Rationale / Consequences recoverable, but it may carry richer substantive coordination content when that prevents shadow documents or semantic invention during distribution into Core patterns and selected non-pattern FPF kind-reference pairs. The same floor also requires the decision-inspection content that later authoring and review otherwise reconstruct manually: exact decision grounds, use-value, first-minute working situation, scenario grounding, alternatives, current disposition map, naming/ontology obligation, selected content distribution, existing-pattern sufficiency/new-pattern necessity, overlap classification, selected-answer stability, impact/boundary graph, practical payoff, and any remaining uncertainty that materially shapes the decision.

Pointer-based DRRs (CC‑DRR.1a) prevent duplicated prose, and distribution into Core patterns and selected non-pattern FPF kind-reference pairs (CC‑DRR.4) keeps the specification itself learnable without turning the DRR into a permanent shadow canon. Process-law ordering, gate, and handoff records stay outside because they are not part of the content answer that FPF is selecting.