F.9:12.0 - Two display glossaries

This constructed case supplies its complete local meanings. Display scheme A has the closed value domain {0, 1, 2} and uses high exactly for value 2. Display scheme B has the same closed domain and uses high exactly for values 1 and 2. These sentences are the complete glossary definitions for this case; no claim about a real measurement scale or acceptance status is made.

Cell A is <scheme A by value, high, value = 2>; cell B is <scheme B by value, high, value = 1 or value = 2>. The different sense claims give different semantic-context projections. Each glossary definition directly supports its cell’s exact claim under that scheme, so its F.17 LocalSenseBasisRelation can be cited separately.

Profile P declares Narrower-than, oriented A → B. Its relation condition is proper inclusion of the admitted values; it applies only to the two complete definitions printed above. The Boolean test is {2} ⊂ {1, 2}: 0 belongs to neither set, 1 only to B’s set, and 2 to both. The closed domain and both membership rules are its required dependencies; an absent or unresolved rule stops the test. All dependencies are present and the test is true, so the exact Bridge b obtains for these cells and P.

Now propose two uses. For the first, u is to explain that every A-high value is B-high; d is A → B; r is membership implication for each value in the closed domain; t permits no counterexample. The C.2.1 claim about b is affirmative. For the second, u is to replace B-high by A-high in the same explanation; d is B → A; r again requires membership implication for every value; t again permits no counterexample. Value 1 defeats that rule, so this claim is negative while b remains unchanged.

For reliance on this bounded explanation, the A.10 descriptive account cites the two exact glossary definitions, their independently established cell-basis relations, and the complete three-value comparison. Those inputs supply the evidence required by these membership rules; pass is limited to this explanation of the printed definitions. No actual named assurance claim is current. The first result is one obtaining Bridge and two separately warranted use claims, not a published glossary, an operational classification or performed Work. No Card is needed for this one-case explanation.

Sections 12.1–12.4 are application sketches. Their external source labels and profile placeholders must be replaced by exact cells, rules, dependencies and evidence before an actual positive Bridge or passing reliance is claimed.