Re: (Almost) approved (Re: Draft of the Transition Request for the updated CR of tracking-dnt)

> On Oct 12, 2017, at 12:05 PM, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org> wrote:
> 
> Hello Roy and Dave,
> 
> The Director approved[1] the publication of the updated CR, but under 
> the condition that two edits are made (see below). Can you make those 
> edits?
> 
> [1] https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Member/chairs/2017OctDec/0019.html
> 
> 
> 1) Update the reference to WebIDL to point to the Recommendation instead 
> of the editors' draft, i.e., to
> https://www.w3.org/TR/2016/REC-WebIDL-1-20161215/
> 
> (I tried, but I didn't find a way to do it through ReSpec. But you may 
> have more success.)
> 
> 
> 2) Add the text about changes that was in the transition request also in 
> the document itself. It can either be in a separate section "Changes" or 
> in the "Status of this document". That text is:
> 
>    The client-side scripting API has been rewritten to use fewer
>    functions and to return Promises. (These are JavaScript functions
>    that scripts in an interactive document or application call to ask
>    the user to consent to tracking and to store the answer in the
>    browser's storage, as well as to check if the browser's storage
>    already contains such a consent.)
> 
>    Terminology has been updated to use terms from HTML5.
> 
>    The specification now defines how to extend the Tk header (part of
>    the HTTP-based protocol), e.g., to comply with possible future legal
>    requirements. No such extensions are currently known.
> 
>    The ability to add extensions to the DNT header (another part of the 
>    HTTP-based protocol) is no longer marked “at risk”, because the
>    group considers that this feature cannot be removed.
> 
> (The explanations in parentheses were meant for the readers of the 
> Transition Request. I'm not sure they are needed in the document itself. 
> But I'll let you decide.)


Alright, I think I've done it correctly ...

   https://w3c.github.io/dnt/drafts/CRc-tracking-dnt.html

Note that the actual diff is larger because of the recent ReSpec release:

   https://github.com/w3c/dnt/commits/master/drafts/CRc-tracking-dnt.html

and for some reason that changed the CSS for RFC2119 MUST/MAY/etc. keywords.
Maybe 3.1 should be updated as well?

....Roy

Received on Friday, 13 October 2017 23:40:25 UTC