Today was finalizing plan #8 and completing it (more or less); then formulating plan #9:

***********************
***
Eighth plan modification:
***

1. DONE: Test the assumption that Maple Ridge properties were heavily transacted between the T2 in the current spreadsheet and 1949-04-01.

2. DONE: Add a column to the lot spreadsheet which shows the full consideration in 2018 dollars for each title. E.g. T1_CONSIDERATION_2018.

3. DONE: In the lot-based spreadsheet, add a T0, which is the last non-nominal transaction prior to T1 which includes an ancestor property of the root property (for all rows in the spreadsheet).

4. DONE: Add documentation of the VLA spreadsheet to the data dictionary.

5. DONE: Specify end date for T5s in data dictionary.

6. DONE: Fix the sequencing of titles in the BreezeMap output. (CAVEAT: there appears to be a small subset of titles for which this is not working, including 26684. I can't figure out why yet, but it seems to be working fine for the vast majority, so unless it's a priority I'll put it aside for now.)
***********************

This is plan #9, for your final approval:

***********************
***
Ninth plan modification:
***

1. Rename the original lot spreadsheet property_stats_data_by_lot_2018_orig.

2. Create a post-custodian sales spreadsheet of titles
    (property_stats_data_by_title_post_custodian_2018) like this:
      a) Get all custodian sales.
      b) For each custodian sale title, get the properties.
      c) For all those properties, get descending properties.
      d) Get all titles covering that expanded set of properties.
      e) Filter those titles to exclude any which pre-date the
         original custodian sale.
      f) Add the remaining titles to a list.
      g) For each distinct title in the list, ordered by title id,
         output a row.

      QUESTION: Do you care about nominal versus non-nominal in
                this spreadsheet?

3. Create a new version of the original lot spreadsheet
    (property_stats_data_by_lot_2018_no_cust_T3) in which
    T3 is never allowed to be a custodian sale. Call this the
    no-custodian-T3 rule.

4. Create another new version of the original lot spreadsheet
    (property_stats_data_by_lot_2018_last_cust) in which we always
    use the last transaction by the custodian rather than the first
    (the last-custodian rule).

5. Create a new version of the current lot spreadsheet
    (property_stats_data_by_lot_2018_strict_descent) where the
    descendant-property scenario is modified such that at each
    stage, we only retrieve descendants of properties in the
    preceding stage, rather than any descendant of the ur-property.

    QUESTION: does it matter that this will inevitably give rise
              to chains where the later titles have no land in
              common with the earlier titles?
    QUESTION: should this spreadsheet use the no-custodian-T3 rule?
    QUESTION: should this spreadsheet use the last-custodian rule?

*******************