Readings: interpretation, group, selection and pin

In one sentence: interpretation packs a disputed chunk of theory — rules, priorities, definitions — into a named reading of a document; interpretation_group declares the fork (exactly_one / any_of / compose_explicitly), and the case context (interpretation Name;) selects which reading applies. The author takes them when one text reads several ways: a narrow and a broad reading of an article, literal versus court.

A reading packs a disputed chunk of theory — rules, priorities, definitions — into a named variant of a document; a group declares the fork, and the case context selects which variant applies. This catalogue records the practice first.

OverviewBoundariesCorpus formsPitfalls

1. When to take it and when not to

Instead	Selection rule
Two separate packages vs two readings	A dispute over reading one document is two interpretations in one package with a group; different documents are different packages. A reading lives next to its pinned primary source (of Fragment)
include R vs a nested rule	A ready rule takes part in a reading — include R (brings the whole canonical expansion: R/alt/N, R/unless/N, R/norm/*, R/head/N). A rule written for the reading’s sake — a nested rule (the reading’s namespace)
status disputed vs a group	A status selects nothing: a “disputed” reading with no group always applies. A fork with a choice is only an interpretation_group; a status is metadata for the jurisdiction profile
exactly_one vs any_of	One right answer, choice mandatory — exactly_one (without a choice the dependent queries get INTERPRETATION_REQUIRED). Both readings admissible at once — any_of (the corpus pairs below are built this way)
A reading vs priority	Different readings of one norm are readings. A clash of two operative norms is priority. A reading does not rank; priority does not construe
A reading vs the judgment channel	An evaluative feature (“excessive”, “material”) is a judge or a court fact; a dispute over a norm’s meaning is a reading. Do not confuse: the judge decides a fact, the reading decides the theory

2. Minimal example

Package examples/two-readings/: a filing fee reads two ways — literal (standard) and court (reduced). Full code — examples/two-readings/package.law.

Arxo Law

interpretation Literal {
    status reviewed;
    rule QLiteral strict {
        for c: Case;
        when filed(c);
        then standard_rate(c);
    }
}

interpretation Court {
    status reviewed;
    rule QCourt strict {
        for c: Case;
        when filed(c);
        then reduced_rate(c);
    }
}

interpretation_group MeaningOfRate {
    alternatives Literal, Court;
    selection exactly_one;
}

Case facts: filed(alpha). Selection: the context line interpretation Literal;. Query: evaluate truth(standard_rate(alpha)).

The engine’s actual answer:

Output

law test research.constructs.interp_readings: мир research.constructs.interp_readings
  ok   [research.constructs.interp_readings#authored] tests/01-literal-selected.lawtest / urn:query:research-interp-01
  ok   [research.constructs.interp_readings#authored] tests/02-court-selected.lawtest / urn:query:research-interp-02
итого: 2 проверено, 2 прошли, 0 не прошли, 0 не исполнены; код 0

law engine check — check OK, no warnings. Sensitivity: replacing interpretation Literal; with interpretation Court; for the same query changes the answer from TRUE_ONLY to NEITHER (rule QLiteral blocked, another reading selected); deleting the selection line gives INTERPRETATION_REQUIRED — held by the second package examples/unresolved-group/tests/01-dependent-blocked.lawtest on the same form. Every fact and every context line load-bearing.

Nearest wrong outcome: expecting that without a choice “the first” reading wins — no: with exactly_one and no choice a dependent query answers nothing at all; the language has no “first/last” order.

3. Example across domains

• Law: narrow and broad readings of the Turkish Constitution’s art. 13 proviso — package tr.constitution — Constitution of Türkiye (NarrowGroundReading / BroadGroundReading, both status disputed, group RestrictionGroundReading, policy any_of; the broad one includes rule GroundStatedAnywhereInConstitution). The “relevant article = the right’s own article vs any article” fork is the canonical subject of readings (see corpus-forms.md).
• Law: Iran’s Guardian Council supervision — package ir.constitution — Constitution of Iran (ApprobatorySupervision / InformationalSupervisionReading, both disputed, any_of group): approbatory vs informational supervision.
• History/custom: the Yasa’s tolerance — package mng.corpus.yasa — the Mongol Yasa (TolerationAsCommandReading / TolerationAsPracticeReading, any_of group): command vs practice; three more groups of the same fork form nearby (ServiceScopeReadings, HorseTheftReadings).
• Law: DPRK Constitution collectivism — package kp.constitution — Constitution of the DPRK (declarative ground vs exercise condition, exactly_one group): the same form with a mandatory selection policy.
• Teaching case: examples/unresolved-group/ — the same fork plus a base BaseRegister rule outside the readings: a dependent query without a choice is INTERPRETATION_REQUIRED, an independent one is TRUE_ONLY + COMPUTED.

4. How the engine answers

Table — actual runs of this directory’s examples:

Context	Question	Answer	Why
interpretation Literal	standard_rate	TRUE_ONLY + COMPUTED	the selected reading activates its nodes
interpretation Court	reduced_rate	TRUE_ONLY + COMPUTED	the same for the second alternative
interpretation Court	standard_rate	NEITHER	QLiteral blocked: another reading selected
no choice (exactly_one)	standard_rate	INTERPRETATION_REQUIRED	the group unresolved, the query depends on it
no choice (exactly_one)	case_open (base theory)	TRUE_ONLY + COMPUTED	the query is independent of the group; demanding a choice answers the wrong question

• INTERPRETATION_REQUIRED is a RESULT status, not a document one: only dependent queries get it. Dependence is the closure over rule bodies from the blocked alternatives’ heads (the same edge extractor as stratification): direct production, transit through intermediate rules, head-reading by alternatives, collect-dependence, positional dependence.
• The INTERPRETATION_REQUIRED issue stays in the document even with an independent answer — it is a fact about the input.
• status (proposed … binding … rejected) alone selects nothing: the selection policy is set by the jurisdiction profile, not the reading.
• Cross-rule checks (cycle, late producer, priorities, defeater goal) run membership-aware: a cycle across two alternatives of one exactly_one group is statically unreported — it cannot realize.

5. Common mistakes

1. include R brought a rule without its generated nodes — previously; today the whole canonical expansion comes in (see pitfalls.md).
2. A qualified include pkg::R is rejected: an import carries the interface, not nodes; another’s rule takes part through the owner’s pub interpretation and extends/alternatives (see pitfalls.md).
3. A nested rule with an unbound head lived to runtime — previously; today nested members are checked with the same LDC-E4101 code under the lowering name (see pitfalls.md).
4. status disputed with no group — the reading always applies: status does not select (see pitfalls.md).
5. Expecting an answer “under the first” with no choice — with exactly_one a dependent query gives INTERPRETATION_REQUIRED, not the first alternative’s answer (see pitfalls.md).
6. An independent query extinguished with the document — previously; today it gets COMPUTED and its truthStatus (see pitfalls.md).
7. exclude without extends removes the wrong thing: exclude R removes the same expansion that include R brings (see pitfalls.md).

6. References

• The language specification defines readings, the include expansion, nesting, status, groups, evaluating alternatives, extends, conflicting editions, and the context axis; this page states how to use them.
• Details: corpus-forms.md, pitfalls.md, boundaries.md.