F.7:9 - Micro-illustrations

The examples show table shapes. Every positive relation still requires its own evidence in an actual use.

Comparison or use	Exact source-local entries	Obtaining relations	Loss and boundary	Basis	Conclusion
Explain two class-order notations	OWL 2 `SubClassOf`; FPF `U.SubtypeRelation` claim	An explicit representation or semantic relation, if established for the selected expressions	OWL profile semantics and FPF kind criteria may differ	C.3, C.29, A.6.3.RT, and cited sources	Use one didactic gloss only within the stated notation comparison; do not include FCA order by resemblance.

Comparison or use	Exact source-local entries	Obtaining relations	Loss and boundary	Basis	Conclusion
Compare values against a service target	SOSA result claim; ISO 80000 quantity value; ITIL metric value	Exact measurement, scale and unit, and any source-local semantic relations that actually obtain	Composite ITIL indices may lack unit fidelity	C.16, F.9 when needed, cited observations	Comparable only for the named characteristic, scale conversion, population, and window.

Comparison or use	Exact source-local entries	Obtaining relations	Loss and boundary	Basis	Conclusion
Prevent homonym collapse	BPMN workflow graph; PROV time-bounded activity; thermodynamic trajectory	None asserted by this row	Design structure, occurrence, and trajectory are different subjects	F.0.1, F.3, and direct source passages	Keep distinct unless a later question establishes a specific relation.