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.2.9 for communicative Work; A.6.3.CR for wording; A.6.3.RT for representation; A.6.3.NAR, E.17.EFP, or E.24.PUB for narrative, explanation, or publication. A.10 for evidence, C.28 for causation, and C.11 only 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)