Language vision regarding safety guarantees

tczajka: > Safety requirements are simply the part of the (single) contract This is unproductive terminology bikeshed, right? I hope you see that your single contract is made of a logic part (with requirements and guarantees) and a safety part (with requirements). And I hope you are able to unambiguously map those to "logic contract" and "safety contract", otherwise I'm not sure it's worth continuing to reply to this thread.