fpf.tools
Jump to text
On this page
Copy and source
Original source · lines 3762–3773
Published source confirmed at last check

Source changed 2026-10-14 19:58:00 UTC · snapshot created 2026-10-14 19:58:38 UTC · last check 2026-10-15 00:55:16 UTC

PSDA.16:12 - Relations

  • PSDA.15 supplies bounded follow-up evidence only when it can change the repertoire decision under the same relevant conditions and horizon. A local observation neither entails nor authorizes the repertoire result.
  • PSDA.4 chooses and combines Methods for an engagement; this pattern develops and maintains the reusable offerings and their limits. It does not require a new repertoire cycle before every selection.
  • PSDA.13, PSDA.5, PSDA.6, PSDA.7, PSDA.8, PSDA.9, PSDA.14, PSDA.15 and PSDA.17 expose participation, alternative, comparison, recommendation, follow-up and arrangement requirements that a Method offering may need to preserve. Their available descriptions are not evidence of this particular Method’s enactment or effectiveness.
  • A.3.1 governs Method identification; A.3.1.MR supplies candidate recovery only under its actual source/occurrence conditions; A.3.2 governs a MethodDescription rather than admitting every multi-Method package.
  • A.3.1.MV can supply qualified generic variant, derivation and non-variant maintenance guidance. Resemblance or shared repertoire vocabulary does not by itself establish a formal Method-specialization relation.
  • A.10 and A.15.9 qualify and obtain exact source or specialist results. A.10.1 and G.11 apply to their respective affected-use and currentness questions, not as substitutes for the field repertoire decision.
  • G.5 declares a selector-facing result when that claim is live over identified members and grounds; it supplies neither a universal Method-family classification nor professional fit.
  • C.36 governs the cultural relation claims. PSDA.18 uses this repertoire as evidence or a variant for a separately bounded cultural decision; missing generation, transmission, receiving-enactment, recognition, selection, retention and loss links remain unproved.
  • An unavailable, stale, out-of-scope or incompatible input calls for a qualified direct source or the exact gap. No sibling DPF, whole-language traversal or unperformed specialist result is implied by adjacency.