re: settle the 49.6/92.3 split -- both are real, and the second explanation was wrong too

sylpheed-port corrected their own reconciliation and I reproduced it: 0 nested
records on this disc lack a timed keyframe. All 1530 are static -- timed, every pose
at t == 0 -- so the question is well-formed there and 'not exact' is a real answer,
not an absent one. A static record still declares a cycle length.

So the two percentages are two populations and neither corrects the other: 92.3 % of
animated records, 49.6 % of all nested records including static ones, same numerator
1643. Both need their population attached.

Two wrong explanations preceded this, both mine to carry: that my scan filtered
untimed records, which .max() returning Some(0) prevents, and then their 'questions
never asked' framing which I adopted.

The page is rewritten to the settled state rather than stacked. Nothing the port
depends on moved at any point.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_01Wuu56cE8vJGTBtn1ppsk8v

docs/re/structures/ui-record-loop-length.md

@@ -22,27 +22,36 @@ disc-wide (1 781 records, 0 violations).
 > a secondary statistic**: `+0x08` equals the largest keyframe time *exactly* in
 > half the records and `+0x04` in **none**. No unrelated word reproduces that.
 >
-> 🔴 **AND MY EXPLANATION OF THE 49.6 % WAS WRONG.** I wrote that my scan "requires
-> a timed keyframe", so the population differed. It does not: `.max()` over the
-> keyframe times returns `Some(0)` — not `None` — for a record whose keyframes are
-> all at time 0, so those never left my denominator. `sylpheed-port` reconciled it
-> exactly and I reproduced it:
+> 📌 **THE TWO PERCENTAGES ARE TWO POPULATIONS, and neither corrects the other.**
+> Settled after three rounds, with every number reproduced from both readers:
 >
 > ```
-> 1643 / 1781 = 92.3 %   records where max t > 0 — the question is meaningful
-> 1643 / 3311 = 49.6 %   plus 1 530 records where max t == 0
+> nested RATC records that parse : 3 311
+>    NO timed keyframe at all    :     0
+>    timed, every pose at t == 0 : 1 530   <- STATIC records
+>    timed, largest t > 0        : 1 781   <- animated records
 > ```
 >
-> **Same numerator.** The 1 530 extra are records where *"does the word equal the
-> largest keyframe time?"* has no content — `max t` is 0, so each counts as
-> not-exact **by construction**. 49.6 % is not a weaker 92.3 %; it is 1 643
-> successes over a denominator containing 1 530 questions that were never asked.
+> ```
+> 1643 / 1781 = 92.3 %   of ANIMATED records
+> 1643 / 3311 = 49.6 %   of ALL nested records, static ones included
+> ```
 >
-> ✅ **The conclusion is untouched**: `+0x04` is **0 %** under either denominator,
-> so the offset stands on both scans.
+> **Same numerator.** Both figures are defensible; they answer different questions,
+> and each needs its population attached.
 >
-> ⚠️ **And 92.3 % needs the qualifier it has never carried here**: it is *of the
-> records where the question is meaningful*, not *of nested records*. The consequence for the `PRESS Ⓐ` plate
+> 🔴 **Two wrong explanations were given for the gap before this one, and both were
+> mine to carry.** First I wrote that my scan "requires a timed keyframe" — it does
+> not, because `.max()` returns `Some(0)` rather than `None`. Then, adopting
+> `sylpheed-port`'s reconciliation, I wrote that the 1 530 are *"questions never
+> asked"* with *"no content"* — **also wrong, and they corrected it themselves**:
+> **zero records on this disc lack a timed keyframe.** The 1 530 are **static
+> records**, timed with every pose at 0. A static record still declares a cycle
+> length, so a nonzero `+0x08` against a largest time of 0 is a **real
+> disagreement, not an absent one**.
+>
+> ⚠️ **92.3 % needs the qualifier it has never carried here**: it is *of animated
+> records*, not *of nested records*.
 is then tested against the corpus's existing measurements of the running game,
 which it passes and the previous reading fails.