FPF Reference

    A.2.9:4 — Solution

    Preface node heading:a-2-9-4-solution:6351

    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

    U.SpeechAct is the admitted kernel kind for communicative Work. An individual SA : U.SpeechAct is the actual enactment performed by an admitted accountable U.System under an exact obtaining role assignment within a bounded context. A SpeechActRecord may describe that occurrence and point to utterance descriptions or evidence carriers; none of those epistemic or representational objects is the act.

    A.2.9:4.1 — Normative definition

    U.SpeechAct <: U.Work is a kind declaration. An actual Work individual is admitted as SA : U.SpeechAct when its primary effect is communicative: it places an utterance into a context in a way that is recognized by that context’s institutional semantics (policies, procedures, protocol rules) as potentially:

    • asserting/informing,
    • requesting/directing,
    • promising/committing (as an instituting act),
    • declaring/authorizing/revoking (status-changing acts),
    • notifying (event announcement relevant for downstream work).

    Per A.7 and A.15.1, the actual speech-act occurrence is a Work individual; its SpeechActRecord and utterance descriptions are epistemes, while its carriers are utterance carriers, publication carriers, or traces that allow observation and audit. (Note: “Surface” is reserved for MVPK publication/interoperability surfaces; do not use it here.)

    Whether a given act type institutes commitments, permissions, or status changes is entirely context-policy dependent. Absent an explicit policy, treat SA : U.SpeechAct only as an actual communicative Work occurrence; neither its kind membership nor a complete-looking record licenses a deontic inference.

    A.2.9:4.2 — Minimal occurrence-description record (normative)

    Use the following declaration schema only when a receiving use needs a persistent claim about an actual or candidate speech-act occurrence. The record fields state claims about the referenced occurrence; they are not fields stored in the Work individual and do not make it occur.

    U.SpeechAct <: U.Work

SpeechActRef ::= U.EntityRef
  // resolves to one actual Work individual admitted as SA : U.SpeechAct

SpeechActRecord <: U.Episteme

SpeechActRecord ::=
    {
      speechActOccurrenceRef: SpeechActRef,
      performedBy: U.EntityRef,                     // resolves to the admitted U.System that acts
      performedUnderAssignment: RoleAssignmentRef,  // exact covering role/authority ground
      enactsMethodRef: optional<U.EntityRef>,        // resolves to the exact U.Method when recovered
      methodDescriptionRef: optional<U.EpistemeRef>, // separate description, only when the use needs it
      unresolvedEnactsMethodClaimRef: optional<ClaimIdRef>,
      methodRelationGapProvenanceRef: optional<U.EpistemeRef>,
      reliancePosture: observationOnly | relianceReady,
      executedWithin: U.EntityRef,                   // claim about the containing U.System
      window: [start, end | open],                   // claim about the occurrence's actual extent
      judgementContextRef: U.BoundedContextRef,
      utteranceSubjectRefs: optional<set<U.EntityRef>>,
      institutionalTargetRefs: optional<set<U.EntityRef>>,
      actTypes: set<SpeechActTypeRef>,               // ≥1 act types (supports multi-function)
      addressedTo: optional<set<AddresseeRef>>,      // optional: who is addressed / audience
      utteranceRefs: optional<set<DescriptionRef>>,  // where the utterance description is stated or recorded (A.7: Description)
      carrierRefs: optional<set<CarrierRef>>,        // evidence carriers/traces (A.7: Carrier; use A.10 when evidentiary)
      institutes: optional<InstitutedEffects>,       // references to objects/claims instituted/updated by this act
      notes: optional<InformativeText>               // explicitly informative
    }

DescriptionRef ::=
  ClaimIdRef | EpistemeRef
  // Pointer to an utterance description (e.g., spec clause claim ID, a policy episteme, a message-content episteme).

SpeechActTypeRef ::=
  ContextLocalTokenRef
  // Must be defined/recognized in the Work’s judgement context (bounded context).

AddresseeRef ::=
  PartyRef | RoleRef | RoleAssignmentRef

GrantedPermissionRelationRef@Context ::= U.EntityRef
  // resolves only to one exact GrantedPermissionRelation@Context occurrence

EpistemePublicationRelationRef ::= U.EntityRef
  // resolves only to one exact E.24.PUB EpistemePublicationRelation occurrence

InstitutedEffects ::=
  {
    commitments: optional<set<CommitmentIdRef>>,
    permissions: optional<set<GrantedPermissionRelationRef@Context>>,
    roleAssignments: optional<set<RoleAssignmentRef>>,
    publicationRelations: optional<set<EpistemePublicationRelationRef>>
  }

    Occurrence-side constraints:

    • (SA‑C0) Actual Work conformance. The individual referenced by speechActOccurrenceRef MUST independently satisfy U.Work conformance (A.15.1), including the actual performer system, covering assignment, enacted method, containing system, temporal extent, and judgement-context anchoring. A complete record neither creates those facts nor substitutes for them.
    • (SA‑C1) The accountable system performs; the assignment grounds. The occurrence's actual performer MUST be an admitted U.System. The exact obtaining U.RoleAssignment under which it acts MUST have that system in HolderSystemSlot and cover the act. The assignment supplies role, authority, and attribution ground; it does not perform the act.
    • (SA‑C2) Act types are occurrence classifications and context-local. The occurrence MUST instantiate at least one SpeechActTypeRef recognized in its judgement context. A token written into a record does not establish that classification unless the context's predicate is satisfied.
    • (SA‑C3) Time honesty. The occurrence MUST have an actual temporal extent so freshness can be evaluated; a recorded timestamp is a claim about that extent, not the extent itself.

    Keep three questions separate. utteranceSubjectRefs answers what the utterance or claim is about. institutionalTargetRefs answers which object or relation the act is intended to institute or update under the named policy. Actual change or institutional effect is a third world-side fact and is stated only through its exact direct change/effect relation and the matching typed institutes.* reference when the record needs it. An informative notice or assertion may have a subject without any institutional target or changed entity. Shared reference values do not collapse these relation meanings.

    Record- and reliance-side constraints:

    • (SA‑C4) A relied-on occurrence must be observable. When a gate, checklist, commitment, or grant relies on a SpeechActRef, the SpeechActRecord SHALL identify that same occurrence and cite at least one applicable utteranceRef, carrierRef, or separately governed evidence relation. Evidence-critical uses SHOULD cite at least one carrier through A.10. Record completeness alone does not prove occurrence or institutional force.
    • (SA‑C5) Institutional-effect claims are typed references to world-side effects. institutes.* may reference only the exact commitment or relation occurrence through its declared RefKind. Each institutes.permissions value MUST be a GrantedPermissionRelationRef@Context whose context matches the speech-act occurrence's judgement context or is connected by the explicit Bridge used by the receiving claim. Each institutes.publicationRelations value MUST resolve to an obtaining EpistemePublicationRelation under E.24.PUB. A status claim is an episteme about an effect, not an instituted effect; keep it and its A.10 evidence relation outside institutes.*. The cited policy and direct world-side obtaining conditions still decide whether any effect exists.
    • (SA‑C6) Cross-context use is Bridge-only. If a SpeechActRef or SpeechActRecord is interpreted for checking, gate evidence, or provenance in a different bounded context than the occurrence's judgement context, the receiving claim MUST cite the Bridge/policy that licenses that interpretation rather than assuming equivalent force from the same label.

    A.2.9:4.3 — SpeechActRef discipline (normative)

    A SpeechActRef resolves to one actual Work individual admitted as SA : U.SpeechAct. It never denotes the kind itself or a SpeechActRecord.

    • If another object (for example, U.Commitment.source.speechActRef) cites a SpeechActRef, the referenced occurrence MUST satisfy occurrence-side SA‑C0…SA‑C3. A gate, audit, or provenance use additionally needs the record/evidence basis in SA‑C4 and SA‑C6 when cross-context.
    • A SpeechActRef MUST NOT be replaced by an EpistemeRef (“see the document”) when occurrence provenance is needed. A SpeechActRecord or utterance-description episteme may make claims about the occurrence but is not the act.
    • If a source cannot complete a SpeechActRecord, it may create an observation stub with the candidate speechActOccurrenceRef, known claims, provenance for those claims, and explicit unknowns. When the actual enactsMethod relation is not recoverable, leave enactsMethodRef absent, cite the exact unresolved claim and source-gap provenance, and set reliancePosture=observationOnly. The stub does not make the candidate actual, satisfy occurrence-side conformance, or support gate/deontic provenance. It becomes reliance-ready only after the exact enactsMethod -> U.Method relation is recovered, or after the governing Work architecture explicitly establishes that this occurrence needs no such relation. Never mint an AdHocCommunication or other U.MethodDescription solely to fill the gap; a description neither is the method nor enacts itself.

    A.2.9:4.4 — Separation rules with U.Commitment, GrantedPermissionRelation@Context, and U.PromiseContent (normative)

    1. Speech act is not the enduring deontic relation. A speech-act occurrence may institute a U.Commitment for an obligation, recommendation-as-duty, or prohibition, or a GrantedPermissionRelation@Context for strong permission. The enduring relation is the separately governed object, not the act. Do not encode obligations or permissions as prose inside its SpeechActRecord: cite commitments in institutes.commitments and grants in institutes.permissions, each under the exact instituting policy (A.2.8, A.2.8.PER).

    2. Speech act is not the service promise clause. U.PromiseContent is the promised-outcome statement; a speech act may be the act of offering or issuing that promise, but the promise content lives in the promise-content object and is referenced from the resulting commitments.

    3. Speech act is not the carrier. A “signed approval PDF”, ticket, message, or API log is a carrier; it may carry an utterance-description episteme or a SpeechActRecord. The speech act is the Work occurrence described or evidenced, not either episteme and not the carrier.

    4. Publishing a spec is not a commitment by default. Default interpretation rule (normative). A conformant model/interpreter MUST NOT infer a U.Commitment, GrantedPermissionRelation@Context, publication occurrence, or subject-specific status relation solely from a Publish/Approve speech-act occurrence or its record. Publication work may establish an EpistemePublicationRelation only when E.24.PUB's selected edition, audience, bounded use, form, carrier, and availability conditions obtain. A constitutive policy may let an act institute a subject-specific Approved, Published, or similar status relation; then cite that exact relation occurrence through the subject pattern and separately cite any C.2.1 status claim and A.10 evidence. The claim represents the status; neither its ID nor its publication makes the status obtain.

    A.2.9:4.5 — Multi-function and multi-party support (normative)

    • Multi-function: actTypes is a set. If one utterance performs multiple recognizable acts (e.g., “approve + instruct + warn”), the model may either:

      • identify one speech-act occurrence and let its SpeechActRecord state multiple satisfied actTypes, or
      • identify multiple actual speech-act occurrences and give each its own SpeechActRef; their records may share the same carrierRefs/utteranceRefs. In either case, institutional effects must remain referenceable (SA‑C5).

    • Multi-party: addressedTo is a set and may include roles/parties/assignments. If addressees matter for validity (e.g., “approval by CAB chair to deployment bot”), they should be explicit.

    Last Updated: 2026-07-28 — upstream FPF commit 17edd955 (github.com/ailev/FPF)