SYSE.7:2 - Problem
A hidden gap in the description set can invalidate an engineering decision. Check whether the descriptions make the following clear:
- the receiving decision and the claim that a description is expected to change;
- the actual System, intended referent, configuration, part, environment, Work occurrence, or other holon that a claim concerns;
- whether two descriptions concern the same individual, the same kind, related parts, successive configurations, or merely similarly named subjects;
- the reference scheme, scale, coordinate frame, units, tolerance, assumptions, omissions, and modeled interval;
- whether an alleged cross-description link is a representation correspondence, source dependency, configuration relation, transformation relation, evidence relation, or only a navigation aid;
- the edition and currentness of each source episteme and the Work that still relies on it;
- whether a diagram or simulation output describes a candidate, an intended configuration, an actual configuration, an observed occurrence, or a possible-future structure;
- which Agents produced, checked, changed, published, or use each result, through which Work and with what capability and authority;
- which contradiction, unsupported relation, or omitted characteristic blocks the next decision;
- what observation, configuration change, source change, or decision change requires refresh.
The result is often a false impression of precision. Every artifact may have an identifier and version while the central engineering claim remains ambiguous. Automated trace generation can multiply this impression: thousands of links exist, yet the project cannot say which direct relation each link records or which decision would change if the linked claim failed.