CC-F4-01 | Is the exact C.2.1 EntityOfConcern one local system-role kind? |
CC-F4-02 | Are the candidate domain, operative membership condition, intended member/non-member boundary, continuity rule, current KindSignature, and effective scheme recoverable, with source or practice provenance used only to locate or compare definitions? |
CC-F4-02a | Are the description episteme, local kind, KindSignature, effective scheme, optional F.17 cell and basis relation, and candidate-classification judgment kept separate, with optional values added only when the receiving use needs them? |
CC-F4-03 | Is the description separate from the kind, classification judgment, NameCard, public row, publication form, and carrier? |
CC-F4-04 | Does first entry preserve the full A.1 range of possible systems rather than imply only non-human technical systems? |
CC-F4-05 | Are classification and assignment handled separately under C.3.2 and A.2.1? |
CC-F4-06 | Are capability claims handled under A.2.2? |
CC-F4-07 | Are Method, plan, and Work claims handled under A.3, A.15, and their direct neighbors? |
CC-F4-08 | Are evidence, source, standard, requirement, publication, assurance, status, permission, and responsibility claims sent to exact direct relations? |
CC-F4-09 | Are bare-role participant, declaration, interface, and representation uses recovered through E.10.ROLE and A.6.RSIR? |
CC-F4-10 | Are durable public names handled through F.18 and actual cross-local relations handled through C.3.3 or F.9 according to their endpoints? |
CC-F4-11 | Are missing neighboring values left unknown, unresolved, not asserted, or not current rather than forced into the card? |