#A.6.B:10 — Conformance Checklist
Preface node
heading:a-6-b-10-conformance-checklist:7565
#Content
| ID | Requirement | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| CC‑A.6.B.1 (Atomicity). | A conforming boundary text SHALL decompose mixed sentences into atomic claims such that each atomic claim routes to exactly one quadrant L/A/D/E. | Makes routing unambiguous; prevents contract soup. |
| CC‑A.6.B.2 (Quadrant routing). | Each atomic claim MUST be classified by the Boundary Norm Square and placed in its canonical landing zone (L→Signature.Laws; A→Mechanism.AdmissibilityConditions; D→Norms/Commitments; E→Evidence/Carriers). | Preserves stack modularity and evolvability. |
| CC‑A.6.B.3 (Form constraints). | L-* and A-* claims MUST NOT contain RFC deontic keywords as operators; D-* claims MUST name an accountable agent/role; E-* claims SHOULD NOT use RFC deontic keywords. | Keeps modalities separated and audit‑ready. |
| CC‑A.6.B.4 (Explicit references). | Where a claim depends on another routed claim, that dependency MUST be expressed by explicit ID reference rather than restating the other claim in new words. | Prevents paraphrase drift across layers/faces. |
| CC‑A.6.B.5 (E‑claim adjudicability). | Each E-* claim SHOULD include (a) observation conditions, (b) carrier class/schema reference, and (c) viewpoint/consumer. | Makes work‑effects adjudicable rather than aspirational. |
| CC‑A.6.B.6 (No gate smuggling). | Operational admissibility predicates MUST NOT appear as L-* laws in the signature layer; they MUST be A-* claims in the mechanism layer. | Preserves substitution and signature stability. |
| CC‑A.6.B.7 (No upward dependencies). | L-* claims MUST NOT reference A-*, D-*, or E-*; A-* and E-* claims MUST NOT reference D-*. | Preserves layering and prevents hidden coupling. |