#A.6.C:2 — Problem

Preface node heading:a-6-c-2-problem:10511

#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 an author write (or repair) contract-language so that:

1. Agency is not misattributed to descriptions (signatures, docs, specs, “interfaces”),
2. Governance claims are distinguishable from permission-looking gate, exercise, evaluation, conflict, and source claims by the job of each atomic statement rather than by A.2.8.PER membership,
3. Operational “guarantees” become adjudicable via explicit evidence expectations, without smuggling evidence into semantics,
4. Multi-view publication (MVPK faces) does not create parallel Contract Bundles or rival canonical claim sets by paraphrase drift?

---

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