FPF Reference

    WORDING — Repair language without replacing the project question

    Preface node heading:wording-repair-language-without-replacing-the-project-question:613

    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 load-bearing sentence hides the subject, relation, kind, use, or nearby false inference.
    • Question: What should the reader understand and do, and which distinctions matter for that use?
    • First useful result or honest blocker: One plain repaired sentence, direct clarification, local naming result, or exact missing subject, sense, test, or reader use.
    • Mantra: Recover the ordinary project sentence first. Name what it is about, what it claims, and who must use it; add ontological distinctions only where they change truth, understanding, or action; choose a durable name only when later use needs one; rewrite in plain technical language; check the result with a cold reader; retain a guard only under F.19's full grounded-contribution test; return to the domain task.
    • Start with: F.19; use E.10 for unresolved FPF wording, and F.18, F.0.1, F.9, or the subject's direct pattern only when needed.
    • Stop or return: Stop when the reader can understand the claim and carry out its intended use. Do not continue ontology work after the language problem is solved.

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