FPF Reference

    A.2.9:2 — Problem

    Preface node heading:a-2-9-2-problem:7397

    What this page is

    This is generated FPF reference text from the specification preface or supporting sections. It helps interpret FPF; it is not FPF Reference product documentation.

    Methodology

    Use it to understand how the specification wants to be read, then return to a route, pattern, or work packet for active work. Cite generated IDs only when the wording changes the task decision.

    Content

    How can FPF represent communicative enactments so that:

    1. Agency is explicit: the actual performer U.System first has the A.13 core for this communicative action—one exact local agential system-role kind and criterion, classification, the same obtaining assignment, scope, working situation, window, and adequate core evidence. A.15.1 then independently admits the act from its performance history, Method, extent, and containment. Only afterward does F.6 establish performedUnderAssignment through the same obtaining assignment when precise assignment-bound attribution is current. A characteristic profile remains conditional on a consumed Grade, autonomy or profile result, criterion-dependent characteristic, or assurance use.
    2. The act is locatable in time: the act has an explicit Window (and thus freshness can be evaluated).
    3. The act is locatable in meaning: the act satisfies a type defined by an exact recognition-taxonomy episteme under an effective reference scheme; no generic bounded-context participant or Work judgement-context field substitutes for that basis, and U.ClaimScope remains only a claim-applicability object when a receiving claim needs one.
    4. The act is auditable: it has at least one declared utterance description, evidence carrier, or both when used for gate checks or governance.
    5. Institutional effects are linkable: the act can institute or update commitments, system-role assignments, statuses, and other exact relations by reference only after each effect's direct obtaining conditions hold.
    6. Ambiguity is handled pragmatically: the model supports multi-function and multi-party communication without requiring full linguistic pragmatics.
    7. Receiving use stays affordable: a practitioner can name who should understand or do what, judge the available evidence, and repair the smallest blocker or stop without first constructing a complete occurrence record.

    Last Updated: 2026-09-03 — upstream FPF commit b999972c (github.com/ailev/FPF)