SCR-F13-S01 (local continuity). Every renames/aliases preserves the exact semantic projection, intended use and any independently governed value. An external row or description label resolves its target under the applicable rule.
SCR-F13-S02 (Truthfulness). Each rename retains its exact old and new expressions. A changed LocalExpression has a distinct F.17 cell even when meaning is unchanged. Any claim of governed-value or episteme continuity satisfies that subject’s rule.
SCR‑F13‑S03 (Alias budget). For any one thing and register, the number of deprecated aliases is ≤ 1.
SCR‑F13‑S04 (Non‑retroactivity). No requirement or suggestion to rewrite past texts is present; continuity is expressed as read‑paths.
SCR-F13-S05 (Row integrity). A display-label rename preserves the exact comparison content and receiving use. Changed row content receives its warranted revision, split or merge under F.7; changed F.17 identity-bearing claims receive the corresponding later row episteme.
SCR‑F13‑S06 (Bridge discipline). No alias/rename is used to imply Cross‑context sameness; any such relation belongs under F.9.
F.13:15.2 - Regression (RSCR)
RSCR-F13-E01 (Edition drift audit). Compare affected earlier/later definitions and naming uses. Stable meaning can support a rename with distinct expression-bearing cells; changed meaning requires the subject-governed revision, replacement, split, merge or retirement before fresh naming settlement.
RSCR‑F13‑E02 (Alias creep check). Periodically ensure alias budgets remain within ≤ 1 per register; surplus aliases are pruned.
RSCR-F13-E03 (Bridge leak check). A claimed correspondence between different semantic projections is tested under F.9 only when a current use needs it. Retain exact meanings and an honest unresolved result when obtaining is unestablished; do not create a Bridge by rewriting a note.
RSCR‑F13‑E04 (Didactic continuity). Sampling of examples shows that readers can resolve legacy labels to current ones without confusion (via the continuity notes).