COMMUNICATION-FOR-USE — Make communication useful, then learn from what happens
Preface node
heading:communication-for-use-make-communication-useful-then-learn-from-what-happens:559
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
- Situation: A report, model, message, or answer seems clear, but its intended use and evidence are unclear, including whether its producer can use it later.
- Question: Who should understand or do what with it, what evidence is enough, and what should change if that use is not achieved?
- First useful result or honest blocker: A supported decision to keep or repair it, change prerequisites or a future use, or stop, with evidence, causation, and permission limits.
- Mantra: Name who should understand or do what. Judge the act of communicating against that use. Keep the act distinct from its wording and medium; separate interpretation, response, later action, world change, and causal contribution. Repair wording, representation, prerequisites, medium, interaction, or a future use—or stop. Check authority, consent, and admissibility separately. Do not rewrite the earlier use after seeing the response.
- Start with:
A.2.9for communicative Work;A.6.3.CRfor wording;A.6.3.RTfor representation;A.6.3.NAR,E.17.EFP, orE.24.PUBfor narrative, explanation, or publication.A.10for evidence,C.28for causation, andC.11only to compare repair options. - Stop or return: Stop when the named use has enough support or a blocker is explicit. Response or silence alone proves neither meaning, success, causation, authority, consent, nor permission.
Last Updated: 2026-09-03 — upstream FPF commit b999972c (github.com/ailev/FPF)