# Do GP_TITLE records that declare a cycle while sitting at t = 0 actually move?
# ✅ NO -- the declared cycle is visually inert on all 20. 2026-08-31.
#
# WHY THIS EXISTS. A static record still declares a cycle length, so a nonzero
# +0x08 against a largest keyframe time of 0 is a REAL disagreement, not an absent
# one (ui-record-loop-length.md). sylpheed-port turned that into a check on the
# screens they ship; this re-derives it from my reader.
#
#   nested records in GP_TITLE                        : 65
#   declaring a cycle with every pose at t == 0        : 20
#   ...of those, any element with MORE THAN ONE pose   : 0
#
# ✅ A record whose elements each hold a SINGLE pose renders identically looped or
# held -- there is nothing to move between. So holding them still is correct, and
# it is now measured rather than assumed.
#
# ⚠️ IT INCLUDES ptbtn11 / ptbtn12 / ptbtn13 -- EXTRAS' own buttons, in both
# language entries (6 and 9) -- each declaring a 120-unit cycle with one pose per
# element. Had any carried two poses, a menu button the disc says animates would
# have been held still, on the one submenu the port's P5 gate walks.
#
# 📌 The check was one scan and the answer could have gone the other way. It came
# out of asking what the static records MEAN rather than how they are counted --
# the arithmetic thread that produced it corrected itself three times and none of
# those rounds touched anything shipped.
#
# ⚠️ REACH: GP_TITLE only. The other 32 archives are not checked, and 1 530 static
# records exist disc-wide against the 20 here.
