F.18:5.3 - Capability, Method, and Work Names

Keep these separate:

• ShipbuilderSystemRole names one exact local system-role kind;
• ShipbuildingCapability names a capability of an admitted U.System, including an acting holon admitted as a system for that capability claim;
• ShipbuildingMethod names a method or method family;
• HullAssemblyWork names a work family or planning-level work label until an exact performed occurrence is current.

A role-derived or role-method-coupled expression is only a naming cue. First recover the exact value it refers to. If that value is an exact Method or Method family under A.3.1, choose a Method name. If it is an exact U.MethodDescription, U.WorkPlan, or dated U.Work occurrence, name that description episteme, plan episteme, or occurrence separately under A.3.2, A.15.2, or A.15.1; those names are not Method names. If the expression refers to another value, use the rule that defines or tests that value. Only then use F.18 to choose a durable name. An exact relation involving a system-role kind or assignment may constrain who may use a Method or perform Work; it neither creates nor names the Method, description, plan, or Work occurrence.

Treat an action nominal such as testing, assembly, maintenance, evaluation, or inspection as a morphology cue, not a governed kind. Placement in function- or flow-structure prose identifies no U.Function. If the function-like use remains claim-bearing while its exact object or relation is hidden, apply A.6.F; if it is already recoverable, name the exact method, method description, required-transformation or required-effect claim, actual U.Transformation, TransformationFlowStructure locus, functional-view record, plan content, performed-work occurrence, or other governed value under the rule that defines or tests it. Only then use F.18 to choose a durable name. A WBS element, activity, or Work Package remains plan- or assignment-episteme content about intended work; none of these uses identifies a performed Work occurrence admitted under U.Work.

A durable name for performed Work points to one dated occurrence already grounded under A.15.1. An action word, plan row, local work-family label, or U.WorkPlan does not create that occurrence or an assignment.

Every System claimed as an actual performer must already have its A.13 core, including the obtaining assignment for the exact action, scope, situation and window. A.15.1 independently admits the dated Work from its Method, temporal extent, containing System and other required direct facts. Add F.6 only when the naming account or receiving use needs precise attribution through that same assignment; the assignment must cover the Work interval, have the recovered performer as holder and retain every participant required by its declared species. Missing or failed F.6 leaves the independently admitted Work and its durable name intact. A compact naming account cites only the identities its receiving use needs. Add a continuity policy only when interruption, retry, a changed Method or binding, or competing designators make occurrence identity material.

Keep neighbouring direct subject and resource-use claims, A.15.PROD production claims, measurement-result epistemes, evaluation results, C.11 choices or decisions, delivery occurrences, acceptance verdicts, and downstream-effect claims separately named under their direct patterns. When the underlying boundary wording still hides the relation, apply A.6.P.WMR. Use F.18 only after an exact governed value and its use are recovered through a direct subject relation, an exact A.6.1 application binding, or an exact local A.15.PROD/A.6.RCD claim. An exact non-assertability result independently records factually unsupported, missing-information, or missing-governor; none authorizes durable naming, and only missing-governor is an ontology blocker that names the affected use and future subject pattern or relation declaration. This section selects and tests a name. It does not define a second work-occurrence or work-result recovery algorithm.

Method-relation and method-composition names are method-side names too. If a phrase names serial composition, parallel composition, guarded choice, iteration, refinement, substitution, decomposition, parameterization, method-family membership, fallback, or dispatch among methods, first decide which object the phrase names.

• If admitted submethods make one composite way of doing, name the composite U.Method. Use A.3.1 for that Method and B.1.5 or another direct composition pattern for its exact composition relation.
• If the phrase names relations among methods without making one whole Method, name the relations first. When a named use depends on how several such relations are organized, select that U.Structure under A.22 and designate it MethodRelationStructure; state the question and prohibited overread that bound the selection. Identify and constrain each included method-side relation—for example, composition, refinement, substitution, iteration, decomposition, family membership, selection, or fallback—through its A.3.1, G.5, or other defining rule. A claim-bearing episteme that describes such a relation remains separate under C.2.1, and any Work-use relation remains under A.15.
• If the current object is a separately identified episteme that describes one exact admitted Method, A.3.2 may classify it as U.MethodDescription; F.18 names that episteme separately from the Method.
• If an episteme instead describes the selected relation structure, C.2.1 keeps that structure as its exact EntityOfConcern; the episteme is not thereby a U.MethodDescription.

F.18 settles a durable name only after one of those exact objects has been recovered. Algebraic, graph, categorical, process-calculus, matrix, embedding, distributed, or neural notation names the lens or representation only when that lens is the governed value.