Source changed 2026-10-03 08:25:59 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-03 08:26:43 UTC · last check 2026-10-03 10:15:17 UTC
HCD.4:7 - Conformance Checklist
One exact human holder and a compatible HCD.1 demand account or equivalent qualified scope are recoverable.
Later-Work family, configuration, conditions, horizon, evidence window, receiving decision, and representative simultaneous interfaces are explicit.
Each claim row states contribution, current evidence, target, optional intermediate only when useful, conditions, support posture, observation date, uncertainty, discriminating task/evidence, critical-error boundary, trade-off, and next change point.
Profile descriptions and their comparison or aggregate are distinguished from instructional plans, realized learning trajectory, performed learning Work, and human transformation; occurrence and change claims have corresponding evidence.
Any source structure used for the profile is justified by the contributions and mutual constraints in representative Work.
Supported claims to preserve are visible alongside gaps and trade-offs.
An aggregate is used only when it removes no decision-bearing identity, asymmetry, critical-error, support, or uncertainty value.
The profile first returns priority characteristics, trade-offs, limiting gaps, and a recommendation or unresolved question to one named owner.
For any bounded choice, the chooser has applied the ChoiceRule to the required current C.11 inputs; the record includes chooser granularity, pre-existing options, comparison basis, belief, outcome model, rule, applicable inquiry values, emitted result, participation and authority. Keep a reason or limit needed for this or a later use in the substantive result.
A missing decision or evidence value required for the affected conclusion produces profile-decision-blocked with blocked choice, safe boundary, and exact retry condition.
The result fabricates no HCD.2 programme and authorizes no curriculum, provider, employment, safety, legal, clinical, or release action.
The receiver can identify claims to preserve, the consequential gap, what could reverse the recommendation, and who decides next.