Value Ontology and Synthetic a Priori Judgments

I want to examine the power of value ontology to merge analytical with synthetic-a-priori judgments by the calibration of semantics to grammar.

Please help me clarify and verify the terms.

An analytical statement is tautological, it is so "by definition".
A synthetic a-priori statement is a definition of a subject that requires concepts which are not required for the term to be defined semantically. It is rather a substantiation of an analytical truth.

Is this true?

Example: "light moves at the speed of light" is analytical (and a priori)
whereas "the speed of light is 299 792 458 m / s in vacuum"  is synthetic a priori
and "light can be measured in terms of photons" is also synthetic a priori.

Are these proper examples?

No, those synthetics are analytical too, in the end, they simply incorporate concepts that can only be understood with analysis of adjacent tectonics.

Synthetic a prioris seem more to me to be about guessing, making something up that later turns out to be true. This is the basis for Nietzschean understanding of will to power.

"Light moves at the speed of light." analytical

"Light will shine, and at this speed." synthetic a priori

Quote :

"Light will shine, and at this speed." synthetic a priori

Quote :

"the speed of light is 299 792 458 m / s in vacuum"  is synthetic a priori

Aren't these the same?

The first is a feeling; the second, though also a feeling, incorporates analysis of previously sentenced-upon feelings.

The first is a sentence, the second is an agglomeration of sentences.