Nice project.
IF you wanted to go further with this type of thing (and that's a big "if", I realize)--here are some things to consider. You measured on-axis response in a quasi-anechoic environment from a moderately close distance (1 meter). At 1 meter, you can have pretty good control over room reflections at mid and high frequencies--but not at low frequencies. Also, proximity effect is still a factor, boosting the (measured but not real, in your application) low frequencies even further.
So I get the impression that this microphone's response was designed for an overall impression of "clarity" rather than neutrality (= typical of Sony consumer/"prosumer" electrets for decades). I think you would be justified in correcting the low frequencies via an even greater boost than the one your curve suggests. (Your curve doesn't indicate the difference between "M" and "S" channel response, but usually the "S" channel's low frequencies can stand even more of a boost, if you're equalizing them separately.)
--Another suggestion is to measure the response at (say) 45° off-axis, and overlay the results onto your 0° curve to give you some impression of the microphone's diffuse-field response. This can be quite different from the on-axis response, particularly at both ends of the spectrum. When you're recording in a three-dimensional sound environment, the majority of your signal arrives from well off-axis, so you'd want to consider that as well when deciding on a corrective curve.
Finally, I don't know whether your software provides options for smoothing or not, but if so, don't be afraid to use some amount of it. The "jaggies" (large apparent differences in sensitivity at nearly adjacent frequencies) aren't generally meaningful; they could be due to resonances in your microphone, but more often they're due to other artifacts of the measurement setup. If the mike had been four inches closer to the sound source or four inches farther away, the jaggies you'd get would be largely different. Another possible way to reduce them is to use third-octave noise bands instead of a frequency sweep.
--best regards