docs: neutral wording for the reference path and the catalogue counts

Say "referansesti" for the reference-project path in the P7 note, and
replace the declared-number counts of earlier example material with the
shipped synthetic catalogue's own (300 prosessnr, 306 declared numbers)
or a general wording. Comments, docstrings and prose only; no constant
or assertion changes.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>

tests/test_named_known_codes_loadbearing.py

@@ -25,8 +25,8 @@ two shipped
 ``shared/examples`` baselines: 1 each; MAJOR-4's derivation of the synthetic K2 price schedule: 3),
 and the largest REAL delivered price schedule measured is K2's ``prissammenstilling-sheet-1.md`` at
 14 priced rows of 118 lines. Nothing measured reaches the window; it exists for the unmeasured
-schedule of an agreement priced BY process number, where the catalogue measured then declared
-2 727 of them.
+schedule of an agreement priced BY process number, where a process catalogue can declare hundreds
+of them (the shipped synthetic catalogue: 300).
 """
 
 from __future__ import annotations

tests/test_requirement_number_gate_loadbearing.py

@@ -17,8 +17,8 @@ toppnivå-frontmatter i minst ett av grunnlagets dokumenter" — refuse that. Me
 
 * the requirements base declared ``seksjon: 10.4.1`` … ``10.4.4`` and ``req_number: Krav
   10.4.3—2``. The bare ``10.4`` was declared NOWHERE — it is a section PREFIX;
-* the process catalogue declared 2 727 ``prosessnr`` and 2 753 ``seksjon``. ``1.10.4`` was NONE of
-  them: it occurred once, as prose, a chapter reference into ANOTHER standard.
+* ``1.10.4`` was NONE of the process catalogue's declared ``prosessnr`` and ``seksjon`` values:
+  it occurred once, as prose, a chapter reference into ANOTHER standard.
 
 The ordered rule therefore fires on NEITHER of its own known positives. The COMPLEMENT fires on
 BOTH, and it closes a hole ``_ground_against_input`` already admits in writing — "it fails OPEN …