docs: a confidence raised while its revisit trigger was deleted

Five follow-ups from the fix-round re-review, none touching a computed
result.

M20's note had said "moderate-high, not certain" with a specific revisit
trigger attached. The fix round raised the label to "near-certain" and
deleted the trigger in the same edit. Upgrading a confidence while
removing the condition that would lower it again is the one move this
record must not make, so the trigger is restored alongside the higher
label: no primary text anywhere names the Major Litanies in a
Mass-orations-count worked example, only the general II-class-Sunday
rule twice over. RG 434(b) closes the Office-shaped doubt and nothing
further.

"WORD-IDENTICAL" overstated the relation between RG 111(b) and n.
434(b). Only the trailing "quae tamen omittitur si commemoratio
privilegiata facienda sit" is verbatim in both; the openings differ,
n. 434(b) recasting the rule into the orations register. The claim was
self-refuting -- both texts are quoted adjacent to it -- and the
argument never depended on it. Now "identical in its operative clause".

And n. 434 is not "a different part of the same document": the running
heads put RG 111 under Rubricae generales and n. 434 under Rubricae
generales Missalis Romani, two distinct corpora bound in one volume,
which is the entire force of the corroboration. The code comment had
understated its own point.

Also corrects the register's LT line range for n. 434(b) (3574-3576, not
3564-3570; the (b) clause is not in the cited range), and records in
calendar.ml the diagnostic that channel (3) trades away: a rite whose
transfer_target names a date its own disposition omits used to raise a
loud, mislabelled Validate failure and is now silent at the origin. The
kernel cannot distinguish that from a deliberate omission without rite
knowledge it must not have, so accepting it is right -- but the signal
is gone, and that should be written down rather than discovered later.

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/data/ef/expected-divergences-missalemeum.sexp b/data/ef/expected-divergences-missalemeum.sexp
index 6eeeabd..96d6405 100644
--- a/data/ef/expected-divergences-missalemeum.sexp
+++ b/data/ef/expected-divergences-missalemeum.sexp
@@ -221,5 +221,5 @@ REVISED, ef-bvm-saturday task: 395 of the 730 days in this window used to carry
 
  SCOPE, made explicit (fix round 1, F5): RG 108 (\"Commemorationes privilegiatae fiunt in Laudibus et in Vesperis necnon in omnibus Missis; commemorationes vero ordinariae fiunt tantum in Laudibus, in Missis conventualibus et in omnibus Missis lectis\") + RG 81 (\"nihil fit in Officio, sed tantum in Missa\") together mean the Litanies' own privileged slot is due IN THE MASS specifically; nothing here computes or asserts a separate OFFICE-level answer for the same day. colitur emits ONE resolved day, not one per liturgical hour -- this adjudication, and every one of the 829 domain-wide Sunday-displacement days it governs, is the MASS answer. Defensible for a Mass-facing engine (this codebase's own stated scope, citations/readings, is Mass-oriented throughout), but stated here rather than left implicit, since it is what the whole adjudication rests on.
 
- HONESTLY FLAGGED, now closer to certain than first written: this is the first real (non-synthetic) data point this codebase has for \"an ordinary Class2 feast and a privileged non-feast commemoration both losing to the identical Sunday\" -- every other witness for this admit branch in test_precedence_ef.ml is hand-built. First written \"moderate-high, not certain\"; RG 434(b)'s own independent, Mass-specific repetition of RG 111(b)'s exact rule (fix round 1 finding, above) closes the main remaining doubt (that RG 111 might be Office-shaped) and moves this near-certain. missalemeum's divergence remains consistent with this project's already-documented pattern of RG 108-111 gaps in that oracle (M1, M8, M10 above each already \"missalemeum does not implement X\") -- plausibly one more instance of the same generator not modelling RG 109(f)'s privilege for this rare, single-date observance. Identity-gated (test_oracle.ml's own [m20_commemoration_matches]): pins that colitur's own sole admitted commemoration really is [major-litanies].")
+ HONESTLY FLAGGED, now closer to certain than first written: this is the first real (non-synthetic) data point this codebase has for \"an ordinary Class2 feast and a privileged non-feast commemoration both losing to the identical Sunday\" -- every other witness for this admit branch in test_precedence_ef.ml is hand-built. First written \"moderate-high, not certain\"; RG 434(b)'s own independent, Mass-specific repetition of RG 111(b)'s exact rule (fix round 1 finding, above) closes the main remaining doubt (that RG 111 might be Office-shaped) and moves this near-certain -- but NOT to certain, and the revisit trigger stands: no primary text anywhere names the Major Litanies in a Mass-orations-count worked example, only the general II-class-Sunday rule, twice over. RG 434(b) closes the Office-shaped doubt and nothing further. If a future primary-source pass finds textual grounds narrowing RG 109(f)'s privilege specifically, THIS is the entry to revisit first. (That sentence was dropped in the same edit that raised the label to near-certain, and is restored here: upgrading a confidence while deleting its revisit trigger is the one move this record must not make.) missalemeum's divergence remains consistent with this project's already-documented pattern of RG 108-111 gaps in that oracle (M1, M8, M10 above each already \"missalemeum does not implement X\") -- plausibly one more instance of the same generator not modelling RG 109(f)'s privilege for this rare, single-date observance. Identity-gated (test_oracle.ml's own [m20_commemoration_matches]): pins that colitur's own sole admitted commemoration really is [major-litanies].")
  (expected_rows 1))