; data/ef/expected-divergences-fiuv.sexp -- Witnesses task
; (2026-08-22-colitur-celebrant-rubrics-phase1)'s cited allow-list for the
; FIUV Ordo comparison (test/test_fiuv_ordo.ml), fixture window
; 2025-11-27..2026-12-31.
;
; A SEPARATE file from data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp (the LMS
; allow-list, also third-party but England & Wales diocesan and single-
; compiler across its three editions), data/ef/expected-divergences.sexp
; (the lectio allow-list) and data/ef/expected-divergences-missalemeum.sexp
; (the missalemeum/Divinum-Officium-lineage allow-list): the FIUV Ordo is
; a FOURTH, independent lineage -- universal, not diocesan, compiled by a
; different person (Joseph Shaw) than the LMS editions (Peter Day-Milne).
;
; [verdict] names which side this task's own primary-source research
; backs, the SAME convention every other allow-list file in this project
; uses: not always "colitur".
;
; The Creed comparison (Task 6/Witnesses task) found no unexplained
; divergence anywhere in the 400-day window (399 comparable days, Holy
; Saturday excluded per test_creed_coverage -- see that test's own
; citation) and still does not. Phase 2 (celebrant-rubrics-phase1,
; 2026-08-22) extended this file to two more axes, Gloria and Te Deum --
; F1 below (Gloria) and F3 (Te Deum). Both prose-only, the same L2/L5/L6
; convention data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp's own header explains:
; the real enforcement is test_fiuv_ordo.ml's own predicates and count
; assertions, not a machine-loaded [id] record.
;
; F2 and F4 (Te Deum: every vigil; the three September Ember days) were
; found, then CLOSED within the same task: tools/extract_fiuv_ordo.ml's
; own Te Deum parser recognised only ONE of the source's two negative
; phrasings ("non dicitur Te Deum"), so "sine Te Deum" -- how the source
; actually negates a Sunday's/vigil's/Ember-day's own Te Deum -- fell
; through to a bare "Te Deum" substring match and was wrongly read
; [true]. Fixed in the extractor (its own citation has the full account);
; the fixture was re-extracted from the SAME pdftotext dump; 24 of 400
; rows flipped true->false, and colitur's own answer already matched the
; corrected value on every one of them -- no code change needed for F2/
; F4 specifically. See test/fixtures/fiuv-ordo-2025-2026.sexp's own
; "RE-EXTRACTED" note and lib/rites/rite_ef/rubrics_ef.ml's own [te_deum]
; header (237(a)'s comment) for the fuller account, including a real,
; separate regression this same fix round found and reverted (a first
; attempt at "every Sunday says Te Deum" wrongly excluded Christ the
; King, caught by the LMS Ordo's own Gloria axis, 2024-10-27).

; F1 -- OPEN, adjudicated FOR colitur. Fired once: 2026-04-03, Good
; Friday.
;
; The raw source (docs/research/ordo/fiuv-ordo-2025-2026.pdf, page 46,
; verified directly against the PDF, not merely the extracted fixture):
; "3. Nig in Actione liturgica usque ad 4am partem, Viol. in S.
; Communione. FERIA VI IN PASSIONE ET MORTE DOMINI, De ea, I cl. ...
; Missa pr., (omittuntur ps. Iudica me et Gloria Patri), Gloria, sine
; Credo, praef. comm." -- read LITERALLY, this states the Gloria IS said
; on Good Friday. colitur says [false] (RG 432(d)'s own {!Colour.Black}
; proxy this Mass shares with the Requiem population, {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_
; ef.gloria}'s own header).
;
; ADJUDICATED FOR COLITUR: Good Friday's own liturgical action has no
; Mass at all in the 1955-restored Holy Week (RG 28's own "non sit dies
; liturgicus" framing for the Paschal Vigil is the closest parallel this
; project already cites, {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.creed}'s own RG 28-34
; comment) -- no Consecration, no Communion under both species by the
; celebrant, only Communion from the reserved Sacrament. That the Gloria
; is NOT said on Good Friday is among the most widely and consistently
; attested facts in the whole of 1962-rite literature (O'Connell,
; Fortescue, every published Ordo this project has touched, and this
; author's own independent knowledge of the rite) -- essentially
; undisputed. The printed "Missa pr., ..., Gloria, ..." block, structured
; identically to a REAL Mass's own rubric line elsewhere in this same
; Ordo (compare Easter Day's "Missa pr., Gloria, sequentia, Credo, praef.
; Pasch."), most plausibly describes the liturgical action's own
; STRUCTURE using the book's standard notation for bookkeeping
; consistency, or is a genuine single-word compiler error -- neither
; resolvable without contacting the compiler, out of this task's own
; scope. NOT the same failure mode as the Te Deum extractor bug above
; (F2/F4): this is the RAW pdftotext TEXT itself making the claim, not a
; downstream parsing artefact of test_fiuv_ordo.ml's own extraction --
; re-run directly against a fresh -layout dump for this task, not merely
; trusted from the fixture. The PDF's own page IMAGE was not separately
; inspected (out of this task's own tool access), so a pdftotext-layer
; misread (a stray line from an adjacent block folded into this one) is
; not fully ruled out either -- named as a real possibility, not
; silently excluded.
;
; RESOLVED 2026-08-22 (coordinator): the page IMAGE was rendered and read
; (pdftoppm -f 48, the PDF page bearing printed folio 46). TWO findings.
; FIRST, the pdftotext layer is FAITHFUL -- the printed book really does
; carry "Missa pr., (omittuntur ps. Iudica me et Gloria Patri), Gloria,
; sine Credo, praef. comm." under FERIA VI IN PASSIONE ET MORTE DOMINI, so
; the adjacent-block-misread possibility named above is RULED OUT, not
; merely unlikely.
; SECOND, and this is what settles the adjudication rather than resting it
; on external attestation: the SAME PAGE proves the compiler knew the
; distinction and lost it here specifically. Its next entry, "4. Viol ...
; SABBATUM SANCTUM", carries NO "Missa pr." line at all -- correctly, Holy
; Saturday's own Mass being the Vigil's. The entry after it, "5. Alb DOM.
; RESURRECTIONIS", carries a full one. So on one page the book omits the
; Mass line where there is no Mass, and supplies one where there is; Good
; Friday, which likewise has none, wrongly receives one. Its own Vespers
; rubric on the same entry calls the day's rite "Actioni liturgicae
; vespertinae" -- an Action, not a Mass -- contradicting the Mass line four
; lines above it.
; The line is also WORD-FOR-WORD identical to Holy Thursday's own on the
; preceding page ("(omittuntur ps. Iudica me et Gloria Patri), Gloria, sine
; Credo"), where every word of it is correct. A copied line, not a
; considered statement.
; Verdict unchanged (colitur), now on internal evidence from the source
; itself rather than on "every other authority disagrees" -- which is the
; stronger footing, and the one this project's own standard asks for.

; F3 -- OPEN, single-witnessed, colitur's own possible gap (Te Deum
; axis). Fires 6 times, every one of the six dates
; data/ef/expected-divergences-lms.sexp's own L5 already found for
; Gloria: 2026-03-06/07/09/12/21/24, a privileged Lenten or Passiontide
; feria (Class3, RG25) whose own office is impeded and carries exactly
; one commemoration of a Class3 saint. colitur's [te_deum] reads [false]
; (a plain ferial office by every branch {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.te_deum}
; checks); FIUV reads [true] in all six -- confirmed directly against
; the raw pdftotext dump, not merely the fixture: e.g. 12 March, "Ll. 1a
; et 2a (= 2a+3a) de Scr. occ., 3a de festo, Te Deum." -- a genuine,
; unnegated "Te Deum" (neither of the two negative phrasings the
; extractor now checks for), so this is NOT the same failure mode F2/F4
; were.
;
; CITATION: the same n.302(b)/RG431(b) text L5 already cites (LT.txt --
; a MISSAL rubric, not a Breviary one, so its literal text governs the
; MASS's own Gloria, not Matins' Te Deum) does not directly license this
; finding at all -- 237/238 (the BREVIARY rubric {!Rite_ef.Rubrics_ef.
; te_deum} actually implements) has no clause naming a commemoration as
; grounds for Te Deum. What this finding suggests, not yet established:
; the DIVINE OFFICE may treat a commemorated day more generously than the
; MASS does for exactly this shape (a commemorated saint's own lessons
; are read at Matins even on an impeded day, which could plausibly extend
; to Te Deum by an unwritten or unlocated convention) -- genuinely
; speculative, offered as a research lead for a follow-on task, not a
; citation this entry treats as settled.
;
; WHY NOT FIXED HERE: SINGLE-WITNESSED (the LMS fixtures never captured
; Te Deum at all, so there is no second Ordo to corroborate this shape
; the way the Sacred-Triduum/BVM-Saturday/vigil findings elsewhere in
; this task were cross-checked). Fixing it would need the SAME kernel
; signature widening L5 already declines for the identical reason
; (`~commemorations` on {!Colitur_kernel.Rite.t.gloria}, and by extension
; a parallel widening of [te_deum] if the two were ever to diverge in
; their own inputs) -- out of a task briefed to follow creed's existing
; seam exactly. Left OPEN for the same follow-on task L5 recommends.