FPF Reference

    A.6.B:10 — Conformance Checklist

    Preface node heading:a-6-b-10-conformance-checklist:11725

    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

    IDRequirementPurpose
    CC‑A.6.B.1 (Atomicity).A conforming boundary text SHALL decompose mixed sentences into atomic claims such that each atomic claim belongs to exactly one quadrant L/A/D/E.Makes L/A/D/E classification unambiguous; prevents contract soup.
    CC‑A.6.B.2 (Quadrant classification).Each atomic claim MUST be classified by its own modality and adjudication position, not by its subject-pattern family. When permission wording is present, the single branch in §8.4.1 MUST select the claim's job before assigning L/A/D/E.Prevents one pattern catalogue from replacing the square's decision.
    CC‑A.6.B.3 (Form and obtaining constraints).L-* and A-* claims MUST NOT use RFC deontic keywords as operators. A generic-prescription D-* claim MUST name its exact normative source and applicable rule content without inventing an individual occurrence; an individual-duty D-* claim MUST name its actual bearer and exact separately obtaining U.Commitment; a grant D-* claim MUST satisfy §8.4.1. No claim text makes its relation obtain. Responsibility uses its direct predicate or exact missing governor. An E-* claim MUST name the work, evaluation, or observation that settles it and any evidence used for reliance.Keeps normative content, individual institution, responsibility, and evaluated results distinct.
    CC‑A.6.B.4 (Explicit references).Where a claim depends on another L/A/D/E-classified claim, that dependency MUST be expressed by explicit ID reference rather than restating the other claim in new words.Prevents paraphrase drift across layers and faces.
    CC‑A.6.B.5 (E‑claim adjudicability).Each E-* claim names its exact predicate and object plus the actual work, evaluation, or observation, scope/window, comparison frame, and other conditions required to settle that predicate. It adds an evidence/source-use relation, carrier/schema, viewpoint, and consumer only when the receiving reliance decision depends on that support.Makes work-effects adjudicable without forcing unrelated carrier apparatus into every result claim.
    CC‑A.6.B.6 (No gate smuggling).Operational admissibility predicates MUST NOT appear as L-* laws in the signature layer; they MUST be A-* claims in the mechanism layer.Preserves substitution and signature stability.
    CC‑A.6.B.7 (No upward dependencies).L-* claims MUST NOT reference A-*, D-*, or E-*; A-* and E-* claims MUST NOT reference D-*.Preserves layering and prevents hidden coupling.

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