mattiacus as of 21sept2024 + rsigns, correction proposal on lauDAbilis, and EUOUAE standardisation - 4a fits nicely but does not exist in the traditional roman office (pending further research)

https://wiki.omnigreg.at/ant:0397?s[]=magnus&s[]=dominus agrees as well with my restitution

Lauda(ge)bilis prepares a mode 1 ending with ni(d)mis(d) and lauda(gf)bilis prepares a mode 4 ending with ni(e)mis(e). Out of the CantusIndex sources that have the mode 4 ending, DK-Kk 3449, D-KA Aug. LX and CH-E 611 have (gf), three others are adiastematic, and the others do not have a clivis at all on lauDAbilis, but none have lauda(ge)bilis.

Regarding the tone ending, CH-E 611 and KA both have E(h)U(g)O(h)U(i)A(g)E(gh) so while it does not exist in AR1912 I could end up convinced to use E(h)U(g)O(h)U(i)A(g)E(h) as in the AMs.

Adopted the EUOUAE of some early mss for this A/

Fixed differentia in metadata