From ea22ad2bde211998e6719fd5fb76233571a48383 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Lukasz Kasprzak Date: Wed, 12 Aug 2026 15:16:00 +0200 Subject: fix(kernel,rite-ef): admit orders commemorations by RG 113's table of precedence, not slug Precedence_ef.admit broke a same-rank tie among commemoration candidates alphabetically by slug -- a deterministic engineering convention with no rubrical citation. RG 113's own second sentence, primary-source-verified against two independent scans and previously uncited in the register (only "commemoratio de Tempore fit primo loco" was quoted before), gives the real rule: "in admittendis et ordinandis aliis commemorationibus, servetur ordo tabellae praecedentiae" -- admitting and ordering commemorations both run on the rite's own table of precedence (band's 28-entry table), not RG 8's coarse four-class rank. Precedence.resolve now computes each commemoration candidate's own band value once, generically, and hands it to rules.admit as a third tuple element (Precedence.rules.admit's signature changed accordingly, ditto Precedence_ef.admit; every rule-record stub in the test suite updated to match). Precedence_ef.admit's own compare_dignity is replaced by compare_precedence, ordering by band then slug; a residual tie within one identical band value still falls back to slug, since RG 113 gives no further instruction there -- documented as a still-uncited engineering convention, not dressed up as a rubric. RG 98 ("in paritate autem Officium prius impeditum praecedit") was considered as a candidate authority for that residual and rejected: it governs the transfer queue order among several simultaneously-impeded I-class feasts (Caput XIII), a different operation in a different chapter from RG 113's commemoration admission (Caput XVI); nothing in the primary text connects the two. Blast radius measured against the pre-change binary across the entire 1583-9999 domain (not only 2005-2050): the admitted-commemoration-slug set is byte-identical, day for day, before and after this change. The fix corrects the citation and mechanism, not the answer, on this codebase's current data -- both of the task brief's named examples (22 Feb Chair-of-Peter/Lent-vs-Paul, 22 Sept Maurice-vs-Thomas-of- Villanova) are confirmed present and unchanged in both streams. A new test (RG113: admit picks by precedence order, not slug, when they disagree) proves admit actually consults the passed-in precedence value with a synthetic pair whose slug order and precedence order disagree -- teeth a same-band-only regression test could not have caught, since every real collision found in the domain happens to agree on both axes. 271 -> 272 tests, all green; COLITUR_EXHAUSTIVE_SWEEP=1 unaffected. --- lib/kernel/precedence.mli | 15 ++++++++++++++- 1 file changed, 14 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) (limited to 'lib/kernel/precedence.mli') diff --git a/lib/kernel/precedence.mli b/lib/kernel/precedence.mli index d394cb1..09376d7 100644 --- a/lib/kernel/precedence.mli +++ b/lib/kernel/precedence.mli @@ -35,12 +35,25 @@ type ('s, 'r) rules = { admit : observed:'r candidate -> temporal:'r candidate -> - ('r candidate * privilege) list -> + ('r candidate * privilege * int) list -> ('r candidate * privilege) list; (** RG 108-111: how many commemorations are admitted, and in what order; anything filtered out here is recorded in {!resolution.omitted}, not dropped. + Each input triple's trailing [int] is that candidate's own {!band} + value, computed once by {!resolve} (RG 113: "in admittendis et + ordinandis aliis commemorationibus, servetur ordo tabellae + praecedentiae" -- ADMITTING and ORDERING commemorations is governed + by the same table-of-precedence order {!band} already supplies for + picking the day's own winner; docs/research/rules-register.md ยง4 + "Commemorations"). Supplied rather than left for [admit] to compute + itself because [admit] has no [context] (date/season/weekday) of + its own -- {!resolve} already holds one and calls {!band} with it + for every candidate regardless. A rite's [admit] is free to ignore + the value entirely (e.g. fall back to [Vocab.rank] alone), the same + as it may ignore [temporal] below. + [temporal] is {!resolve}'s own [~temporal] argument, passed through unchanged -- the day's temporal-cycle candidate, regardless of whether it won. Fix round 1 (RG16(a) task): before this, a rite's -- cgit v1.3