Optional events anchored on the same trigger (e.g. the four
post-Entscheidung rules in upc.inf.cfi) used to render in catalog
sequence_order, so a 2-month rule (R.118.4 Folgeentscheidungen)
would precede a 1-month rule (R.151 Kostenentscheidung) chained
off the same decision. Now the calculator does a post-evaluation
permutation pass that sorts consecutive same-parent rows by
duration ascending — days < weeks < months < years, ties broken
by duration_value then submission_code.
Different trigger groups keep their proceeding-sequence position
— the walk only ever permutes rows that already share a parent.
Root rules (no parent) are never sorted against each other.
Court-set / conditional rows whose date isn't in the duration
ladder sort LAST within their group.
Verified order against m's report: R.151 cost_app + R.353
rectification (1-month tier) now render before R.220.1
appeal_spawn + R.118.4 cons_orders (2-month tier).
Issue: m/paliad#128
mAi
49ddaa4eb8