FPF Reference

    A.6.8:4.0 — UTS + LEX preparation (mandatory for authoring/repair)

    Preface node heading:a-6-8-4-0-uts-lex-preparation-mandatory-for-authoring-repair:16210

    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

    “Service” is a polysemy cluster, not a single token. Therefore, before applying the rewrite rules below to normative prose, the author/editor SHALL create or update a thread‑local UTS block (F.17) and its paired LEX‑BUNDLE entries (E.10) for the service cluster (Tech/Plain twins and PTG stance).

    Required cluster coverage (minimum). The UTS block MUST cover, at minimum, the co‑moving lexical forms:

    • service / services
    • service provider (and the corresponding provider term in the domain: team/shop/department/vendor, etc.)
    • server (including “daemon”, “host”, “endpoint host” where those appear)
    • microservice / microservices (and spelling variants such as “micro-service”) when they appear in the source prose as a stand‑in for the addressable system facet (“the thing you can call/deploy”) or as a collapsed bundle token
    • “API service” / “service interface” / “service access” (when present in the source prose)
    • “SLA/SLO/service level” language (when present)

    Context selection (universality guard). The UTS block MUST cite ContextName@Edition in each SenseCell (F.17), and the cited contexts SHOULD span at least three distinct “service traditions” reflected in this pattern’s SoTA‑Echoing set (e.g., ITSM/service management, EA/modelling, speech‑act/coordination, microservices/SRE practice). This prevents a “FPF‑only” meaning loop and keeps facet names portable.

    Headphrase governance (no ad‑hoc synonyms).

    • Each facet head phrase used by this pattern (e.g., “promise content”, “service access point”) SHALL appear as a UTS twin (Tech/Plain) in the local UTS block, not as an author‑invented one‑off.
    • Both the Tech and Plain twin for a facet head phrase SHALL carry an explicit head kind word that signals the facet category (clause, role, principal, system, access point, spec, method, commitment, act, or work). Plain synonyms are valid only if they preserve the head kind (e.g., “endpoint” as an access‑point head kind; “API spec” as an access‑spec head kind). This is the readability guard that prevents “mathematician renamings”.
    • A conforming normative Tech text SHALL treat the bare word service (unqualified) as PTG=Guarded (E.10): it is valid only under this pattern’s rewrite rules and only as part of a qualified head phrase.
    • If a new facet head phrase must be introduced, it SHALL be treated as a LexicalAct with an explicit Mint/Reuse decision (F.8), and its CandidateSet + rationale SHOULD be recorded via a Name Card (F.18 / NQD‑front) to avoid “clever” but unstable vocabulary.

    This preparation step is intentionally “linguistic”: it binds the pattern to how engineers actually write (service/provider/server), rather than to an isolated kernel token.

    SoTA binding (informative audit anchor). The major disambiguation rules in §4.4–§4.7 are aligned with the SoTA‑Echoing rows in §11:

    • “offering / promise content” vs “delivery operations” split → ITIL 4 + EA modeling,
    • “interface/access” vs “realization/implementation” split → ArchiMate + SRE practice,
    • “promissory act” vs “promise content” split → ISO 24617‑2 dialogue acts,
    • “offering/commitment” vs “delivery event” split → service ontologies (e.g., S‑OPL / UFO),
    • “actuals/telemetry” vs “targets/obligations” split → SRE evidence discipline,
    • “roles + context” emphasis when discussing “service quality” → service science / service‑dominant logic. (These anchors are informative; they do not assert cross‑Context identity and require Bridges when imported as terms.)

    Last Updated: 2026-06-08 — upstream FPF commit 093d30e8 (github.com/ailev/FPF)