Not a trust ordering. Both sources are cheap reads of the running system
and neither is more authoritative than the other – where they disagree,
D-15 keeps both rather than picking a winner, and
D-17 expects genuine disagreement in the field. Trust
in the object is Provenance, which is a different
question (D-22): where this says who spoke, that says how the collection
happened.
Non-exhaustive enums could have additional variants added in future. Therefore, when matching against variants of non-exhaustive enums, an extra wildcard arm must be added to account for any future variants.
A description a caller merged in, which named no platform API.
Not what deserialization produces: a restored relation carries no
observation at all, because the object’s
Provenance already records that it came from a
file, and restating it here would duplicate a fact D-22 has just
separated. This variant is for the mixed case – a caller adding
described relations to a topology that was discovered – which is
exactly the case per-relation provenance exists to make visible.