Skip to main content

[DSB:THEORY.SEMANTIC_BINDING] [DSI:NAME=CAPITALISATION_IMMUTABILITY_NAMING_RULES;ROLE=LEARNING;AUTHOR=SIMON_MACFARLANE;VERSION=1_0;DATE=DEC2025] [DSM:SYSTEM=SEMANTIC_BINDING;AUDIENCE=PUBLIC,PROFESSIONAL,AUTHORING_SYSTEMS]

Page 5 — Capitalisation, Immutability, and Naming Rules​

[SSB:THEORY.SEMANTIC_BINDING.ENFORCEMENT.PURPOSE.OVERVIEW.5-1] [SSI:TITLE=PURPOSE_AND_POSITIONING;AUTHORITY=SECONDARY;REF=5-1] [SSM:SECTION=CONCEPT;INTENT=DEFINITION;ABSTRACTION=HIGH]

5.1 - Purpose & Positioning​

This document defines the mandatory enforcement rules that make Semantic Binding reliable, stable, and machine-enforceable over time.

These rules govern:

  • capitalisation
  • immutability
  • naming consistency

for all Semantic Binding anchors and taxonomy values.

This document explains:

  • why these rules exist
  • what must never change
  • how semantic stability is preserved as knowledge grows

It does not define tooling, validation code, or ingestion pipelines.

[SSB:THEORY.SEMANTIC_BINDING.ENFORCEMENT.RATIONALE.NEED.5-2] [SSI:TITLE=WHY_ENFORCEMENT_IS_REQUIRED;AUTHORITY=PRIMARY;REF=5-2] [SSM:SECTION=RATIONALE;INTENT=RATIONALE;ABSTRACTION=HIGH]

5.2 - Why Enforcement Is Required​

Without strict enforcement rules:

  • “semantic” structure becomes stylistic
  • meaning drifts silently over time
  • retrieval logic breaks invisibly
  • AI systems compensate with inference

Soft conventions work for prose.
They fail for semantic contracts.

Semantic Binding requires deterministic signals that do not depend on author preference, formatting style, or interpretation.

[SSB:THEORY.SEMANTIC_BINDING.ENFORCEMENT.CAPITALISATION.RULES.5-3] [SSI:TITLE=CAPITALISATION_IS_SEMANTIC;AUTHORITY=PRIMARY;REF=5-3] [SSM:SECTION=RATIONALE;INTENT=RATIONALE;ABSTRACTION=HIGH]

5.3 - Capitalisation Rules​

In Semantic Binding, capitalisation is semantic, not cosmetic.

All Semantic Binding anchors and taxonomy values:

  • are written in UPPER_SNAKE_CASE
  • are case-sensitive
  • must never be auto-normalised

Examples:

  • THEORY
  • SEMANTIC_BINDING
  • CONCEPT
  • ABSTRACTION=HIGH

Capitalisation enables:

  • exact matching
  • unambiguous filtering
  • safe machine enforcement

If capitalisation is inconsistent, semantic meaning is no longer stable.

[SSB:THEORY.SEMANTIC_BINDING.ENFORCEMENT.IMMUTABILITY.CONSTRAINTS.5-4] [SSI:TITLE=IMMUTABILITY_RULES;AUTHORITY=PRIMARY;REF=5-4] [SSM:SECTION=CONSTRAINT;INTENT=CONSTRAINT;ABSTRACTION=HIGH]

5.4 - Immutability Rules​

Once introduced, the following must never be renamed, repurposed, or reinterpreted:

  • DOMAIN values
  • OBJECT values
  • CATEGORY values
  • Anchor names (DSB, DSI, DSM, SSB, SSI, SSM)
  • Abstraction levels (HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW)

These are semantic contracts, not labels.

They may already be:

  • embedded in vectors
  • referenced across documents
  • enforced by retrieval and governance logic

If meaning must change, a new value is introduced.
Old values may be deprecated, but never altered.

[SSB:THEORY.SEMANTIC_BINDING.ENFORCEMENT.NAMING.RULES.5-5] [SSI:TITLE=CANONICAL_NAMING_RULES;AUTHORITY=PRIMARY;REF=5-5] [SSM:SECTION=CONSTRAINT;INTENT=CONSTRAINT;ABSTRACTION=MEDIUM]

5.5 - Naming Rules​

All Semantic Binding identifiers must be:

  • descriptive, not abbreviated
  • stable over time
  • free of system-specific prefixes
  • expressed as nouns or noun phrases

Examples:

  • ✅ SEMANTIC_BINDING
  • ❌ SB
  • ❌ SEM_BIND

Names are chosen for longevity, not convenience.

[SSB:THEORY.SEMANTIC_BINDING.ENFORCEMENT.MUTABILITY.ALLOWED.5-6] [SSI:TITLE=WHAT_MAY_CHANGE_SAFELY;AUTHORITY=PRIMARY;REF=5-6] [SSM:SECTION=RATIONALE;INTENT=RATIONALE;ABSTRACTION=MEDIUM]

5.6 - What Is Allowed to Change​

The following may evolve safely:

  • prose and explanations
  • headings and formatting
  • examples and illustrations
  • document roles and versions

Because semantic meaning is anchored structurally, surface-level changes do not break retrieval, interpretation, or explainability.

This separation is intentional.

[SSB:THEORY.SEMANTIC_BINDING.ENFORCEMENT.FAILURE_MODES.ANALYSIS.5-7] [SSI:TITLE=FAILURE_MODES;AUTHORITY=PRIMARY;REF=5-7] [SSM:SECTION=COMPARISON;INTENT=COMPARISON;ABSTRACTION=MEDIUM]

5.7 - Failure Modes When Rules Are Violated​

When enforcement rules are ignored, systems exhibit:

  • duplicate semantic concepts under different casing
  • silent retrieval gaps
  • inconsistent agent behaviour
  • loss of explainability

These failures are often cumulative and delayed, making them difficult to diagnose after deployment.

[SSB:THEORY.SEMANTIC_BINDING.ENFORCEMENT.SUMMARY.RECAP.5-8] [SSI:TITLE=SUMMARY;AUTHORITY=SECONDARY;REF=5-8] [SSM:SECTION=SUMMARY;INTENT=SUMMARY;ABSTRACTION=HIGH]

5.8 - Summary​

Enforcement rules exist to ensure that Semantic Binding remains:

  • stable over time
  • machine-safe
  • auditable
  • and predictable

By enforcing strict capitalisation, immutability, and naming discipline:

  • meaning cannot drift silently
  • retrieval remains deterministic
  • AI behaviour remains explainable

These rules trade short-term convenience for long-term semantic integrity.

[SSB:THEORY.SEMANTIC_BINDING.ENFORCEMENT.STATUS.DECLARATION.5-9] [SSI:TITLE=STATUS;AUTHORITY=SECONDARY;REF=5-9] [SSM:SECTION=STATUS;INTENT=STATUS;ABSTRACTION=LOW]

5.9 - Status​

Capitalisation, immutability, and naming rules are active, mandatory, and authoritative.

All Semantic Binding systems, documents, and agents must enforce these rules without exception.

Without enforcement, Semantic Binding collapses back into convention, inference, and ambiguity.