| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
Poland and the Benedictines, in the flat INI form, installed beside the
invented diocesan example.
poland.ini -- 17 entries from the Calendarium Perpetuum pro Dioecesium
Poloniae (1964), promulgated under Rubricarum instructum and applying to the
1962 Missal. Transcribed from a published Polish EF ordo that names that same
calendar, cross-checked against missalemeum's supplement page for the two
formularies 1964 added (13 and 15 July). Date, Latin name and class were read
from the source for every entry; three classes could not be recovered from
the PDF's column layout and are marked INFERRED where they appear, with the
reasoning. The header carries an edition warning that is a real trap here:
the Proprium Poloniae of 1921 and 1934 is still bound into many missals and
carries an outdated arrangement of dioceses and ranks. It is not this
calendar, and it is exactly the kind of plausible wrong-edition source that
has cost this project time before.
benedictine.ini -- two entries, and the comment explaining why is the point of
shipping it. Counted across the Norcia ordo: 86 "I cl.", 43 "II cl.", ZERO
"III cl." and ZERO "IV cl.", against 103 "Semidup." and ~96 "Dup.". The
monastic rite uses the Roman classes at the top and the older Duplex /
Semiduplex grades below, exactly where the Roman calendar has III and IV
class. colitur's rank vocabulary cannot express those, so most Benedictine
propers cannot be written here at all -- a mismatch of vocabularies between
related rites, not a gap in the data. Rather than invent a Duplex -> Class3
mapping the source never states, that file ships only what its ordo gives in
Roman terms and lists roughly two dozen excluded feasts BY NAME, so the
omission is visible instead of silent.
Both headers say plainly that they are examples and not authorities: they are
transcriptions from published ordines, none of the five test layers can vouch
for either, and both should be checked against the reader's own ordo. The
cram test asserts only what we control -- that they parse, convert and apply
-- and says so.
They also demonstrate the precedence engine on real data: the Benedictine
Transitus is I class and takes 21 March with the Lenten feria commemorated,
and Maurus is II class and takes 15 January with Paul the First Hermit
commemorated.
|
|
|
`--overlay` shipped last week with nothing to point at. The only example
was a test fixture, explicitly labelled invented and living where no user
would find it, so "colitur supports local calendars" was true but
undemonstrated.
data/ef/examples/diocesan-example.sexp is installed to
<prefix>/share/colitur/examples/ and is runnable documentation: every
celebration in it is invented, with example- slugs that cannot collide,
and its header explains the four directives, the three date shapes, and
the field vocabularies before showing any of them.
It demonstrates the range deliberately rather than the minimum: a
fixed-date local patron with its own propers; a movable dedication on the
first Sunday of October, I class because a church's own dedication
anniversary is I class in that church and at III it would lose to the
Sunday every year; an Easter-relative commemoration; an Edit raising a
universal feast for local use; and a Suppress shown commented out,
because suppressing a universal feast is a real liturgical act and an
example should not invite it casually.
Two things the header says plainly, since this is the one file that lets
someone change what colitur computes: an overlay is applied ON TOP of the
shipped calendar and never instead of it, and an overlay is applied, NOT
validated -- the five test layers assert things about the shipped data
and cannot vouch for a user's file.
A test asserts it loads against the real EF rank vocabulary, still
demonstrates at least four directives, and applies with NO diagnostics.
The last matters most: a directive naming a slug the universal calendar
lacks would warn, and an example that warns teaches the wrong lesson. It
deliberately does not pin which days it produces -- those celebrations
are invented, and pinning their dates would make an illustrative file
behave like calendar data.
|
