A.6.C:5.3 — Show (Episteme archetypes)

Preface node heading:a-6-c-5-3-show-episteme-archetypes:7825

Content

(C) Multiparty protocol boundary (behavioural/session type motif)

Draft wording: “The protocol guarantees progress. Participants must follow the sequence.”

Unpack + route:

Utterance: protocol description (could be a type/protocol spec plus explanatory views).
L: safety/progress properties as laws over the protocol model (truth-conditional, within the theory).
A: admissibility: when an interaction trace is considered valid/admissible (e.g., runtime checks; compilation checks; gating conditions for entering a session).
D: obligations on implementers/operators: implement the protocol; do not send messages outside the allowed state machine; publish conformance artefacts if required.
E: evidence: message trace carriers; conformance test run artefacts; audit trails for disputed interactions.

(D) Socio-technical “SLA + audit trail” boundary

Draft wording: “Provider shall respond within 4 hours for Severity‑1 incidents. Only Severity‑1 is covered. Evidence is provided by ticket logs.”

Unpack + route:

Promise content (service promise clause): responsiveness promise for a defined incident class and window.
Utterance: SLA publication (and its views for different audiences).
A: admissibility predicate for the promise: ticket qualifies iff severity classification meets stated conditions.
D: provider commitment to meet the target; client duties (e.g., provide required info); auditor duties if applicable.
E: evidence: ticket carriers, timestamps, classification records, and the measurement procedure binding “4 hours” to a time window and clock source.