A.6.P:4.9 — A.6.B classification template for RPR relation specifications
Preface node
heading:a-6-p-4-9-a-6-b-classification-template-for-rpr-relation-specifications:12624
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
Any RPR‑pattern that claims boundary-bearing relation semantics SHALL classify its normative content using A.6.B:
- L‑claims: signature‑level structure and invariants/rules (SlotSpecs, polarity, invariants).
- A‑claims: admissibility / “entry gate” rules for using relation instances in specified lanes (e.g., decision use requires witnesses; time dependence requires
Γ_time; cross‑Context use requires Bridges/CL). - D‑claims: deontic obligations on authors/agents (lexical firewall; prohibited umbrella use; rewrite obligations).
- E‑claims: work/evidence expectations and carrier anchoring (what counts as a witness; evidence freshness is a property of carriers, not prose).
A.6.P does not mandate a particular claim‑ID format; it mandates the separation and cross‑reference discipline.
Atomicity + explicit references (normative, recipe-level). Per A.6.B, mixed sentences MUST be decomposed into atomic claims so each claim belongs to exactly one quadrant, and any dependencies MUST be expressed as explicit references (by claim ID or canonical location), not paraphrased duplicates.
No upward dependencies (normative, recipe-level).
L-* claims MUST NOT reference A-*, D-*, or E-*; A-* and E-* claims MUST NOT reference D-*. Where cross‑quadrant coupling is needed, link by explicit IDs in the allowed directions.
Last Updated: 2026-06-08 — upstream FPF commit 093d30e8 (github.com/ailev/FPF)