When a facet rule contains a reference (path) to a non existing node, not the entire security domain should be skipped

There is a delicate difference between a non-existing Reference wrt the facetrule having hipposys:equals = false or true

Namely

1) For non existing Reference and hipposys:equals = false, the FacetRule should be discarded. Note that discarding is something else than a 'always matching rule'! Namely assume there is a domain rule with only a single facetrule that has a non-existing Reference and equals = false, then the domain rule should not add any authorization constrain at all.

2) For non existing Reference and hipposys:equals = true, the FacetRule should not be discarded but the entire Domain rule should be discarded : Namely, facet rules are AND-ed and there is one facet rule in the Domain that never results to a match.

Note that currently, for non existing references, an entire security domain gets discarded. Realize that a security domain consists possibly of multiple domain rules.