diff options
Diffstat (limited to 'data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp')
| -rw-r--r-- | data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp | 446 |
1 files changed, 446 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp b/data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d91028a --- /dev/null +++ b/data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp @@ -0,0 +1,446 @@ +; data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp -- Task 6 (2026-08-21-colitur- +; celebrant-rubrics-phase1)'s cited allow-list for the LMS Ordo comparison +; (test/test_lms_ordo.ml). Extended by the Witnesses task (2026-08-22, +; same phase) from the single 2024-2025 window (2024-11-27..2025-12-31) +; to three: 2023-2024 (2023-12-01..2024-12-31) and 2025-2026 +; (2025-11-28..2026-12-31) joined it. L3/L4 below fired only in the +; 2023-2024 window -- neither recurs in the other two, a fact worth +; keeping visible rather than merging away (see [expected_rows] on each). +; L5/L6 (Phase 2, 2026-08-22) extended the comparison to a second axis, +; Gloria (RG431-432) -- both fire in more than one window, at DIFFERENT +; counts per window, so both are prose-only (L2's own precedent), not +; machine-checked [id] records; see each for the real enforcement site. +; L5 was MISADJUDICATED as "colitur's own gap" and CORRECTED +; (l5-f3-readjudication task, 2026-08-22): see L5's own entry for the +; full account -- it is an OCCURRENCE difference (the LMS Ordo follows +; the 2020 decree Cum Sanctissima, colitur excludes it by binding +; design), not a Gloria defect. +; +; A SEPARATE file from data/ef/expected-divergences.sexp (the lectio +; allow-list) and data/ef/expected-divergences-missalemeum.sexp (the +; missalemeum/Divinum-Officium-lineage allow-list): this Ordo is a THIRD, +; independent lineage (a printed England & Wales diocesan book, ISBN +; 9781739209636, compiled directly from the 1962 Missal/1960 rubrics -- +; never passed through Divinum Officium, missalemeum or lectio), so its +; own divergences are kept apart rather than tangled into either existing +; file's own provenance. +; +; [verdict] names which side this task's own primary-source research +; backs, the SAME convention the missalemeum file's own header states: +; not always "colitur". +; +; L1 -- CLOSED, FIXED (whole-branch review finding 1, 2026-08-22): was +; 2025-11-03 (All Souls' Day, transferred from 2 November, a Sunday that +; year). colitur used to say the Creed IS said (true) on rank alone +; (475(b), Class1) where the Ordo, correctly, says it is not: "Mon 3 ALL +; SOULS' DAY I Cl B / No Gl Sequence No Cr Pr of the Dead No Blessing". +; +; This entry's own PREVIOUS text argued the divergence could not be fixed +; without a signature change, because [creed]'s inputs (temporal/observed/ +; date) have no notion of "this Mass is a Requiem". That argument was +; wrong: {!Colour.Black} is used by exactly TWO celebrations in the whole +; engine (verified by grepping every [colour Black]/[Colour.Black] site in +; lib/ and data/) -- [commemoration-of-all-souls] (data/ef/sanctoral.sexp) +; and Good Friday (temporal_ef.ml, already [false] via the RG 23(b) feria +; exclusion regardless of colour, and has no Mass at all in the +; 1955-restored Holy Week) -- so on every day this engine can construct, +; [colour = Black] if and only if the Mass is a Requiem: a citable +; implication (RG 117 assigns black to Masses of the dead) on THIS DATA, +; not a heuristic guess. [Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.creed] now reads +; [observed.colour] as RG 476(f)'s own guard, positioned ahead of 475(b)'s +; rank branch; see rubrics_ef.ml's own header and the guard's own comment +; for the full account, and test_rubrics_ef.ml's +; [test_colour_black_population_is_exactly_two] for the test that fails +; loudly the day a third [Colour.Black] celebration is ever added, so this +; proxy cannot silently rot. +; +; BLAST RADIUS, measured (full 1583-9999 sweep of {!Colitur_kernel. +; Calendar.year}, grouped by [observed]'s own slug): 8 416 days changed +; from [true] to [false], every one [commemoration-of-all-souls] (missing +; from exactly 1 of the 8 417 domain years -- a boundary-year transfer +; effect at 1583/9999, not a third population member: see the "know what +; each layer cannot see"-style caveats elsewhere in this project for other +; instances of the same edge). A further 8 416 [Colour.Black] days are +; Good Friday ([ef-passiontide-2-friday]), unchanged by this fix (already +; [false] before it, via the earlier feria exclusion) -- confirmed +; [creed_true_among_black = 0] after the fix, over the WHOLE domain, not +; merely the fixture's own 2024-2025 window. +; +; `colitur day`/`colitur readings` are unaffected (neither prints [creed]); +; `colitur rubrics` output changes on exactly the 8 416 days above. + +; L2 -- OPEN, colitur's own gap, found while building L1's fix (whole- +; branch review finding 2, 2026-08-22). NOT an active entry in this +; file's own machine-checked sense (no code loads or cross-checks an +; "L2" id anywhere -- this file's own [allow_entry] machinery is scoped +; to the CREED axis, {!test_lms_ordo.test_creed_matches_or_is_explained} +; alone; a second, unrelated axis reusing the same id-lookup mechanism +; would let one test's "declared but never fired" check spuriously trip +; on the other axis's own entry). Recorded here as prose only, the same +; discipline this file's own closed L1 note above and +; expected-divergences.sexp's own closed C-entries already use for a +; citation worth preserving without a live parser hook -- the REAL +; enforcement is test_lms_ordo.ml's own [test_formulary_override_matches], +; which asserts this population is exactly 3 days directly. +; +; Strengthening test_lms_ordo.ml's formulary-override check from PRESENCE +; to the actual STRING (this same finding 2) surfaced a real, separate +; defect in step 3 of the reading chain ({!Rite_ef.Lectionary_ef. +; readings}), independent of the Creed axis above. Three real days in the +; fixture window -- 2025-05-30 (Friday), 2025-06-02 (Monday), 2025-06-03 +; (Tuesday), all between Ascension Thursday and the following Sunday -- +; have no proper of their own and fall to {!Colitur_kernel. +; Mass_formulary.Preceding_sunday}. colitur resumes the nearest CALENDAR +; Sunday (the "5th"/"6th Sunday after Easter", Paschaltide's own week +; 6/7), but the Missal, and the Ordo, keep saying ASCENSION'S OWN Mass +; through this stretch instead: "Mass of the Ascension" on all three +; days, never a numbered-Sunday title. Step 3 has no notion of "inside +; Ascension's own after-feast period" -- it always resumes the nearest +; preceding Sunday, numbered or not. +; +; STRUCTURAL, not a fixture artefact: the Ascension is a fixed Easter+39 +; (a Thursday inside Paschaltide week 6), so every feria whose own +; Preceding_sunday fallback would otherwise resolve to week 6 or 7 falls +; in this same stretch, every year -- this is not a coincidence of +; 2024-2025 alone, though only this fixture's own window has been checked +; against a real Ordo. +; +; NOT FIXED in this task: fixing it means teaching step 3, or the +; lectionary data, about Ascension's own after-feast period -- the same +; shape as the Christmastide "infra octavam Nativitatis" entries +; data/ef/lectionary.sexp already carries directly rather than resolving +; through this fallback -- a lectionary-data change out of a fix round's +; own scope. test/test_lms_ordo.ml's own [is_after_ascension] excludes +; this population from the general mapping (bounded ABOVE by Pentecost, +; not merely "later than Ascension" -- see its own citation, corrected +; during the Witnesses task after a first version manufactured 8 false +; failures by matching any later date in the same civil year), and +; [test_formulary_override_matches] asserts its exact size per window. +; +; CORRECTED (Witnesses task, 2026-08-22): this note previously said "exactly +; 3 real days" as though that were a universal count. Extending the +; comparison to 2023-2024 and 2025-2026 showed it is not -- the population +; depends on which OTHER days that particular year's Ascension-adjacent +; week happen to have their own competing propers (a saint, a vigil), so +; it varies year to year: 3 in 2024-2025, 1 in 2023-2024 (only 30 May 2024 +; -- Rogation Monday, 6 May 2024, is BEFORE Ascension and correctly resumes +; the ordinary "5th Sunday after Easter" instead, once the exclusion's own +; date comparison was corrected to test "after Ascension AND before +; Pentecost" rather than "week 6 or 7"), 2 in 2025-2026. All three counts +; measured directly, all showing "Mass of the Ascension", none unexplained. +; +; Domain-wide count: unmeasured -- "which feria is inside Ascension's own +; after-feast period" is not a distinct predicate anywhere in this +; codebase to sweep on. Structurally recurs every year, though the exact +; per-year count is now known to vary (1-3 in the three years measured), +; not a flat "3 days/year". + +; L3 -- CLOSED, FIXED (bissextile-shift task, 2026-08-22; NOT an active +; sexp record any more, same convention L1 above established -- removed +; from [test_allow_list_ids_are_exactly_l3_l4]'s own expected set, which +; now names L4 alone). Was OPEN, colitur's OWN genuine gap, found +; extending this suite to the 2023-2024 window (Witnesses task, +; 2026-08-22), firing once: 2024-02-24. +; +; Citation, preserved verbatim: the Missale Romanum's own CALENDARIUM +; table, February, footnote (docs/research/LT.txt:5011-5013, scan- +; corroborated docs/research/scan2.txt:3050-3058, OCR-damaged to +; "bi&sextili"/"Matthue"/"Cabrielis" but unmistakable against the +; undamaged transcription): "In anno bissextili mensis februarius est +; dierum 29, et festum S. Matthiae celebratur die 25 februarii, ac festum +; S. Gabrielis a Virgine perdolente 28 februarii, et bis dicitur sexto +; calendas, id est die 24 et die 25" -- in a leap year February has 29 +; days, St Matthias is kept on 25 February (not 24), St Gabriel of Our +; Lady of Sorrows on 28 February (not 27), and the sixth kalends of March +; is said twice. Not RG-numbered -- a calendarium footnote, not a +; Rubricae Generales paragraph. +; +; FIXED: {!Rite_ef.Temporal_ef.bissextile_fixed_key}, threaded through +; {!Colitur_kernel.Rite.t}'s new [fixed_key] field (read only by +; {!Colitur_kernel.Layer.on_date}'s FIXED half, so the kernel stays +; rite-agnostic -- a rite that supplies nothing behaves exactly as +; before). Implemented as the rubric's own MECHANISM (every fixed entry +; from 24 through 28 February shifts one civil day later in a leap year, +; 24 February itself carrying no fixed entry that year), not as "move +; these two named saints": the two are indistinguishable on shipped data +; (nothing else is fixed in that window) and diverge only for a future +; [--overlay] entry in the same range, which the mechanism reading covers +; and a two-saints special case would not. +; +; 2024-02-24/25 now MATCH the Ordo: colitur's Creed follows the same +; Matthias-vacates-24/loses-outright-on-the-Sunday-25th path the note +; below already inferred from the Ordo's own titles, and the LMS +; 2023-2024 suite's Creed and formulary-override checks are both green +; (the formulary bucket's own [expected_proper] constant dropped 182->181 +; for this window: 24 February is now the Ember Saturday's own Own_slug- +; sourced proper, not Matthias's Proper-sourced one, leaving the counted +; population rather than changing which slug's proper it is). +; +; BLAST RADIUS, MEASURED (full 1583-9999 sweep, {!Colitur_kernel.Calendar. +; year} run twice per civil year -- once with the real [fixed_key], once +; with it forced to the identity default -- every changed liturgical day +; diffed on observed slug/rank/colour/subject/commemorations; throwaway +; probe, tools/probe_bissextile.ml, run for this task and not committed, +; same precedent as tools/probe_matthias.ml above): +; +; - ALL 2 041 leap years in the domain show at least one visible +; Matthias-related change, and separately all 2 041 show at least one +; Gabriel-related change -- every leap year in 1583-9999 is touched. +; - 6 983 individual liturgical days change domain-wide, ZERO +; unclassified: exactly four shapes, all the same mechanism -- +; Matthias vacates 24 February (1 803 years) and newly appears on 25 +; February (1 811 years); Gabriel vacates 27 February (1 699 years) +; and newly appears on 28 February (1 670 years). "Vacates"/"appears" +; covers BOTH observed-outright and commemorated-only presence, not +; observed alone -- RG 111's admission cap can relegate the shifted +; saint to a bare commemoration rather than the day's own office, and +; a classifier that only watched [observed] undercounted by roughly a +; tenth on a first pass (found and corrected before this note was +; written: the OBSERVED-outright figures alone, tracked separately +; for direct comparison against this entry's own prior estimate +; below, are 1 677 for Matthias and 571 for Gabriel). +; - THIS ENTRY'S OWN PRIOR ESTIMATE, checked: "of 2 041 leap years, +; colitur observes matthias on 24 February in 1 650 of them" is +; confirmed close but not exact against the real, precisely-measured +; figure on the SAME (observed-outright-only) definition -- 1 677, a +; 2% difference consistent with the prior probe's own "roughly +; measured" caveat, not a sign either probe was wrong in kind. The +; prior estimate's own further caveat -- "some of those years may see +; identical final output either way" -- is also confirmed real but +; small: 1 677 (narrow, observed-only) vs 1 803 (broad, observed-or- +; commemorated) for the SAME 24-February-vacated population shows the +; narrow definition undercounts genuine visible impact rather than +; overcounting it, because a saint who only lost outright pre-fix +; (never observed, never commemorated, invisible either way) is +; absent from BOTH counts and was never the source of the gap between +; them. +; - Gabriel's own sibling shift, unwitnessed by this fixture's own +; 2023-2024 window (no divergence fired on either 27 or 28 February +; 2024 -- 2024's own competing office there does not expose it), is +; the identical mechanism and closes with the same fix; its own +; measured figures are recorded above for the first time, this entry +; having previously had no estimate for it at all. +; +; The differential (lectio, layer 3) gained a new cited entry for its own +; 2005-2050 window, data/ef/expected-divergences.sexp's C40 -- lectio +; implements no such shift either (confirmed directly against the +; fixture: Matthias/Gabriel sit at their PRE-shift dates in every one of +; the 11 leap years that window covers), so every leap year in it now +; diverges on the two shifted days, 21 rows total. See C40's own note for +; the row-by-row account. + +; L4 -- OPEN, adjudicated FOR colitur (a defensible primary-source reading, +; not a fix confirmed against the Ordo -- the Ordo's own contrary reading is +; also textually arguable, see below). Fired once: 2023-12-24. +((id L4) + (citation "RG 30(a) (Caput V, De Vigiliis, docs/research/LT.txt:959-961): \"vigilia Nativitatis Domini quae, IN OCCURRENTIA, locum tenet dominicae IV Adventus, de qua, proinde, NULLA FIT COMMEMORATIO\" -- the Vigil of the Nativity, when it occurs [on a Sunday], TAKES THE PLACE of the 4th Sunday of Advent, of which, accordingly, no commemoration is made -- the identical \"locum tenet ... nulla fit commemoratio\" shape RG16(a) uses for a Feast of the Lord occurring on a II-class Sunday, which colitur already implements and which RG475(a) explicitly extends the Creed to (\"in qualibet dominica, etsi eius Officium alicui festo locum cedat\").") + (verdict open) + (note "2023-12-24 (the 4th Sunday of Advent AND Christmas Eve, a genuinely rare coincidence -- roughly 1 year in 7 -- absent from both the 2024-2025 and 2025-2026 windows, where Christmas Eve falls on a Tuesday and a Wednesday respectively). colitur says the Creed IS said (true), reading [temporal]'s own weekday (Sunday) per RG475(a)'s clause, positioned ahead of the vigil-exclusion check in {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.creed} -- unconditionally, the same way it already does for RG16(a)'s Feast-of-the-Lord case. The Ordo says \"No Gl No Cr\" for this date. ADJUDICATED FOR COLITUR, not merely left open by default: RG30(a)'s own \"locum tenet ... nulla fit commemoratio\" language is textually closer to RG16(a) (which colitur already treats as Creed-preserving) than to an ordinary vigil superseding a Sunday -- the Vigil does not merely WIN THE DAY, it takes the SUNDAY'S OWN IDENTITY, the same shape RG475(a) was written to reach. The COUNTER-reading is real and not dismissed here: RG475(a)'s own text says \"locum cedat ... festo\" (gives way to a FEAST), and RG35 (Caput VI) classifies feria/vigilia/festum as three distinct liturgical-day categories -- a strict textual reading could confine 475(a)'s override to FEAST-displacement only, leaving a VIGIL-displaced Sunday to fall through to the general vigil exclusion (476, via RG33's own \"a vigil is a distinct category\" reasoning already coded elsewhere in {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.creed}). Left OPEN rather than closed on this task's own authority: adjudicating scripture-grade primary-source questions is out of scope for a witness-wiring task, and the two readings are both defensible. Not fixable inside this task's own no-lib-changes constraint regardless of which reading eventually wins.") + (expected_rows 1)) + +; L5 -- MISADJUDICATED, NOW CORRECTED (l5-f3-readjudication task, +; 2026-08-22). This entry previously read "OPEN, colitur's own gap" -- +; WRONG, on two independent grounds (below). It is NOT a Gloria defect +; of colitur's. It is NOT a rubric dispute at all: it is an OCCURRENCE +; difference, because the LMS Ordo is compiled to the 2020 decree Cum +; Sanctissima (its own introduction says so, docs/research/ordo/ +; PROVENANCE-lms.md) and colitur excludes that decree from its 1962 core +; by BINDING DESIGN (CLAUDE.md decision 2: "Every addition [2020 Quo +; Magis/Cum Sanctissima, any community's proper] is an overlay, never +; core"). On these 16 dates colitur and the LMS Ordo each correctly +; describe a DIFFERENT, both genuine, calendar -- they were never +; disagreeing about the same one. VERDICT: colitur correct. NOT an +; active machine-checked [id] entry -- same reasoning L2 above gives: +; the count varies window to window (5 in 2023-2024, 5 in 2024-2025, 6 +; in 2025-2026), so a single static [expected_rows] cannot check it. The +; REAL enforcement is test_lms_ordo.ml's own [is_l5_lenten_commemoration] +; predicate plus [make_suite]'s own ~expected_gloria_l5 parameter, +; asserted per window directly -- KEPT, unlike a bug-driven divergence +; that stops firing once fixed (data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp's +; own F3, closed by this same task, is that other shape): this one is +; EXPECTED TO RECUR IN EVERY FUTURE WINDOW, because the exclusion it +; reflects is a standing design decision, not a defect to remove. +; +; THE ORIGINAL, SUPERSEDED HYPOTHESIS -- preserved below verbatim, the +; same "retain the wrong reading and say why it was wrong" convention +; L3's and F1's own history in this file already establish, NOT deleted: +; +; SHAPE, identical in all 16 instances found (5+5+6, zero exceptions): +; a privileged Lenten or Passiontide feria (Class3, violet -- RG25, +; {!Rite_ef.Temporal_ef.ferial_rank}) whose own office is impeded and +; carries EXACTLY ONE commemoration, of a Class3 saint colitur's own +; precedence engine (independently validated, layers 3-5) correctly +; reduces to a mere commemoration. colitur's [gloria] reads [false] (the +; day is a plain ferial office by every test [Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.te_deum] +; runs -- no Sunday, no vigil, no octave, [named] = [None], [subject] = +; [Temporal]); the Ordo reads [true] in every one of the 16 instances. +; (This description of the SHAPE is still accurate -- what was wrong is +; the CONCLUSION drawn from it, below.) +; +; CITATION (docs/research/LT.txt:2359-2361, "V - De Missis festivis", +; quoted in rubrics_ef.ml's own [gloria] header in full): "302. Sensu +; autem latiore, dicuntur quoque Missae de festo: ... b) Missa de +; commemoratione in Officio diei occurrente" -- in the WIDER sense, a Mass +; "of a commemoration occurring in the day's own Office" is ALSO called a +; "Missa festiva" -- and RG431(b): "Hymnus Gloria in excelsis dicitur ... +; in Missis festivis de quibus n. 302" -- such a Mass says the Gloria. +; Textually, this appears to be EXACTLY the shape found: the day's own +; ferial Office, carrying a commemoration, is elevated to "festive" status +; for the Gloria specifically. +; +; WHY NOT FIXED HERE (the original text, which already quoted the very +; clause that defeats its own hypothesis, below, but did not follow it +; to its conclusion): n.303(b), the very next paragraph (LT.txt:2359-2367, +; same quote in rubrics_ef.ml), qualifies n.302(b)'s own Masses: "dici +; potest tantum si occurrit dies liturgicus IV classis" -- CAN ONLY BE +; SAID if the liturgical day occurring is IV class. Every instance found +; here is a Class3 PRIVILEGED FERIA (RG25), not IV class, which reads as a +; textual CONTRADICTION of the empirical finding rather than a +; confirmation of it -- unresolved without n.304 onward (not in this +; project's sources), which may clarify that 301-303 govern which Mass a +; priest may freely CHOOSE among several options in one church on one day +; (a dimension colitur does not model -- see [gloria]'s own SCOPE NOTE), +; a different question from "does THE Mass actually said, once +; determined, say the Gloria" (431(b)'s own question). Implementing this +; also has a real architectural cost this task's own instructions +; explicitly avoided: [Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.gloria] would need a FOURTH +; parameter, the day's own {!Colitur_kernel.Liturgical_day.t.commemorations} +; -- a kernel [Rite.t.gloria] signature change, the same shape RG16(a)'s +; own [admit] fix needed a [~temporal] parameter for, and squarely out of +; a task briefed to "follow exactly how creed was wired -- same seam". +; Left OPEN, not guessed into a possibly-wrong rule. Recommended for a +; follow-on task, ideally alongside Phase 3's Preface work (RG483 governs +; a DIFFERENT, but textually adjacent, commemoration-vs-Mass-part +; question, so the two may share the same kernel signature widening). +; +; UPDATE (same original task, after wiring the FIUV Ordo's own Gloria and +; Te Deum axes, test_fiuv_ordo.ml): this paragraph previously said FIUV's +; own [gloria] axis was not compared at all. It now is, and the result +; WEAKENS this entry's own case rather than strengthening it: FIUV's own +; [gloria] is [false] on all six of these exact dates in its window -- +; AGREEING WITH COLITUR, DIRECTLY CONTRADICTING the LMS Ordo's [true] +; above. So this is not "colitur has a corroborated gap", it is "two +; independent Ordos disagree with EACH OTHER on Gloria for this shape, +; and colitur happens to agree with the universal one, not the diocesan +; one". What FIUV's OWN Te Deum axis DOES show for the identical six +; dates: [true] -- Te Deum, unlike Gloria, genuinely IS said at Matins on +; these days (data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp's own F3), a real, +; single-witness finding that this entry's own n.302(b)/431(b) citation +; may in fact belong to the DIVINE OFFICE, not the MASS -- which would +; mean L5 itself is answering the wrong question, not merely open. +; Genuinely uncertain which of the two Mass-Gloria witnesses (LMS or +; FIUV) is right for this shape; left OPEN, not adjudicated either way, +; for a follow-on task with more primary-source access than this one had. +; (CORRECTED, l5-f3-readjudication task: F3's own "single-witness +; finding" was never a Te Deum finding at all -- it was +; tools/extract_fiuv_ordo.ml reading the WRONG PRINTED OFFICE, see below. +; There was no Office-vs-Mass question to be uncertain about.) +; +; THE CORRECTION, in full (l5-f3-readjudication task, 2026-08-22): +; +; 1. RG303(b) ALREADY DEFEATS the n.302(b)/431(b) hypothesis on its own +; terms -- the original text above quoted it but stopped short of the +; conclusion. Quoted again, in full, because it is the load-bearing +; sentence: "dici potest tantum si occurrit dies liturgicus IV +; classis" -- [a Mass "of a commemoration occurring in the day's own +; Office"] MAY BE SAID ONLY IF the liturgical day occurring is FOURTH +; class. A privileged Lenten or Passiontide feria is THIRD class +; (RG25) -- every one of these 16 instances. So n.302(b) is +; PROHIBITED, not merely inapplicable, on precisely the days this +; entry covers, and 431(b)'s own Gloria elevation, which depends on +; 302(b), can never reach them. Not "unresolved without n.304" as the +; original text guessed: 303(b) alone already closes the question, +; the wrong way for the original hypothesis. +; +; 2. THE FIUV ORDO PRINTS BOTH OPTIONS, and this is decisive on its own, +; independent of (1). All 16 LMS dates are Lenten/Passiontide +; privileged ferias; six of them fall inside the FIUV fixture's own +; 2025-2026 window (2026-03-06/07/09/12/21/24 -- the same six F3 +; named). For every one of the six, the raw FIUV source (verified +; directly against a fresh pdftotext -layout dump, not merely the +; fixture) prints TWO complete readings for the SAME civil date, +; separated by a literal "-VEL-" ("or") token. 24 March 2026, in +; full: +; +; 24. Viol Feria III post Dom. I Passionis, De ea, III cl. - Off. feriale temp. Passionis. +; Ad LAUDES ... comm. S Gabrielis Archangeli. +; Missa pr., (omittuntur ps. Iudica me et Gloria Patri), sine Gloria, comm. S +; Gabrielis Archangeli, sine Credo, praef. de Sancta Cruce or. super populum. +; I VESPERAE de seq., comm. huius diei. - Compl. de dom. +; -VEL- +; Feria III. S Gabrielis Archangeli, III cl. (Priv.) - Off. ordinarium. - Ad Mat. +; Ll. 1a et 2a (= 2a + 3a) de Scr. occ., 3a de festo, Te Deum. - Ad LAUDES comm. +; Feriae. +; Missa pr., Gloria, comm. Feriae, tractus, sine Credo, praef. de Sancta Cruce vel +; de Angelis. +; +; The FIRST option is strict 1962: the feria wins, "sine Gloria", no +; Te Deum stated, the saint merely commemorated -- EXACTLY colitur's +; own answer, field for field. The SECOND, after "-VEL-", is the +; Cum-Sanctissima-elevated option: the saint's own feast, "Off. +; ordinarium", Gloria, Te Deum, the feria commemorated instead -- +; EXACTLY the LMS Ordo's own answer. The FIUV Ordo's own title page +; states the convention this book uses throughout for exactly this +; distinction (N.B., page 1, verified directly against the PDF): +; "days of the third class to which the norms of the decree Cum +; santissima [sic] apply are marked 'III cl.' ... but days ... to +; which these norms do not apply are marked 'III cl. (Priv.)'." One +; document, compiled by a THIRD party independent of both colitur's +; own lineage and the LMS, prints BOTH engines' own answers side by +; side as two legitimate readings of two different calendars. There +; is no dispute left to adjudicate. +; +; So the Gloria and Te Deum RULES were never in dispute at all: each +; engine's answer follows correctly from its own occurrence result, on +; its own calendar. What this entry originally described as "colitur's +; own gap" is colitur correctly implementing the 1962 core it was built +; to implement, diverging from a printed book that, by its own +; introduction, deliberately implements something else. +; +; NOTE ALSO (so a reader arriving here from +; data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp's own F3 does not draw the +; wrong conclusion from that entry's own closure): F3 did NOT +; "corroborate" or "contradict" L5 at any point in this history. Both +; were the same underlying fact read two different ways, and F3's own +; apparent Te Deum-true reading was never a real second data point in +; the first place -- it was tools/extract_fiuv_ordo.ml's own +; [extract_te_deum] silently reading the SECOND ("-VEL-") office's own +; Te Deum instead of the primary's, on exactly these six dates, closed +; by fixing the extractor (tools/extract_fiuv_ordo.ml's own +; [split_at_alt_office]), not by resolving any Office-vs-Mass question. +; See F3's own entry for the full account. + +; L6 -- OPEN, root-caused to a DIFFERENT, PRE-EXISTING bug this Gloria +; comparison merely surfaced, not a Gloria defect itself. Fired once, +; 2023-2024 only (2024-05-06, Rogation Monday) -- absent from the other +; two windows because Rogation Monday/Tuesday is impeded by a real +; sanctoral feast in both of them, so the office's own colour never +; reaches [observed] there. Same non-machine-checked-count reasoning as L5 +; above (count 1/0/0); enforced by test_lms_ordo.ml's own +; [is_l6_rogation_colour] predicate and [make_suite]'s own +; ~expected_gloria_l6 parameter. +; +; {!Rite_ef.Temporal_ef.temporal}'s own Rogation Monday/Tuesday branch +; hardcodes [~colour:Colour.Violet] with NO RG citation at all (verified +; by reading the branch directly, temporal_ef.ml, the Rogation comment +; block). The Ordo shows 2024-05-06 as \"FERIA IV Cl W †\" (white), +; borrowing \"Mass of 5th Sunday after Easter\" (matching colitur's own +; [Mass_formulary.Preceding_sunday] resolution for the identical date) -- +; consistent with RG88 (Caput X, \"De Litaniis maioribus et minoribus\"): +; \"De Litaniis minoribus nihil fit in Officio, sed tantum in Missa\" -- +; nothing changes in the OFFICE for the Minor Litanies, only the Mass +; TEXT is proper, which reads as the Office's own colour (Paschaltide, +; white) staying unchanged, the violet belonging only to the PROCESSION +; that precedes the Mass -- the same PER-ACTION colour nuance this +; project already documents as unmodelled for Palm Sunday's palm +; procession and Good Friday's Communion rite (temporal_ef.ml's own RG126/ +; RG128 citations), not a new kind of gap. +; +; NOT FIXED HERE: out of this task's own scope (Gloria/Te Deum, not the +; temporal cycle's colour assignment), and a real fix needs its own +; measured blast radius across 1583-9999 (every Rogation Monday/Tuesday +; not impeded by a stronger feast) plus a re-check against the +; differential/oracle layers, which already treat Rogation days as +; correctly violet on whatever data they compare against -- a +; cross-layer question, not a one-line patch. Recommended as a follow-on +; task's own first item.") |