FPF Reference

A.6.C:2 — Problem

Preface node heading:a-6-c-2-problem:7660

Content

How can an author write (or repair) contract-language so that:

  1. Agency is not misattributed to descriptions (signatures, docs, specs, “interfaces”),
  2. Governance statements (obligations/commitments) are distinguishable from admissibility gates and from semantic laws,
  3. Operational “guarantees” become adjudicable via explicit evidence expectations, without smuggling evidence into semantics,
  4. Multi-view publication (MVPK faces) does not create “multiple contracts” by paraphrase drift?