Re: [w3c/screen-orientation] Address privacy review feedback (PR #266)

@Copilot commented on this pull request.

## Pull Request Overview

Copilot reviewed 1 out of 1 changed files in this pull request and generated 6 comments.





---

<sub>**Tip:** Customize your code reviews with copilot-instructions.md. <a href="/w3c/screen-orientation/new/gh-pages/.github?filename=copilot-instructions.md" class="Link--inTextBlock" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Create the file</a> or <a href="https://docs.github.com/en/copilot/customizing-copilot/adding-repository-custom-instructions-for-github-copilot" class="Link--inTextBlock" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">learn how to get started</a>.</sub>

> +          <li data-tests="non-fully-active.html">If |document| is not a
+          [=Document/fully active descendant of a top-level traversable with
+          user attention=], [=exception/throw=] an {{"InvalidStateError"}}
+          {{DOMException}}.
           </li>

The Bikeshed link [=Document/fully active descendant of a top-level traversable with user attention=] is not a single defined term and will not resolve. Split this into separate, defined concepts, e.g.: If |document| is not [=Document/fully active=], or |document|'s [=top-level traversable=] does not [=top-level traversable/has user attention=], [=exception/throw=] an {\"InvalidStateError\"} {{DOMException}}.
```suggestion
          <li data-tests="non-fully-active.html">If |document| is not [=Document/fully active=], [=exception/throw=] an {{"InvalidStateError"}} {{DOMException}}.</li>
          <li>If |document|'s [=top-level traversable=] does not [=top-level traversable/has user attention=], [=exception/throw=] an {{"InvalidStateError"}} {{DOMException}}.</li>
```

> +        <li>If |document| is not a [=Document/fully active descendant of a
+        top-level traversable with user attention=], abort these steps.

Same unresolved Bikeshed reference as above. Suggest: If |document| is not [=Document/fully active=], or |document|'s [=top-level traversable=] does not [=top-level traversable/has user attention=], abort these steps.
```suggestion
        <li>If |document| is not [=Document/fully active=], or |document|'s [=top-level traversable=] does not [=top-level traversable/has user attention=], abort these steps.
```

> +          Developers need to be aware that [=documents=] that are not
+          [=Document/fully active descendant of a top-level traversable with
+          user attention=] will not receive orientation change events. However,
+          once a [=document=] meets these requirements again (becomes visible
+          and gains user attention), it will receive change events reflecting
+          the current orientation.

This compound Bikeshed link will not resolve; use separate links for the defined concepts. For example: documents that are not [=Document/fully active=] or whose [=top-level traversable=] does not [=top-level traversable/has user attention=] will not receive orientation change events.
```suggestion
          Developers need to be aware that [=documents=] that are not [=Document/fully active=] or whose [=top-level traversable=] does not [=top-level traversable/has user attention=] will not receive orientation change events. However, once a [=document=] meets these requirements again (becomes visible and gains user attention), it will receive change events reflecting the current orientation.
```

> +          once a [=document=] meets these requirements again (becomes visible
+          and gains user attention), it will receive change events reflecting

[nitpick] The parenthetical equates 'user attention' with 'becomes visible and gains user attention', and further paraphrases it as focus/keyboard input elsewhere; this can misstate the HTML definition of 'has user attention'. Consider removing the paraphrase and rely on the linked term to avoid normative drift, e.g., 'once a [=document=] meets these requirements again, it will receive change events reflecting the current orientation.'
```suggestion
          once a [=document=] meets these requirements again, it will receive change events reflecting
```

> +        <li>Events originate from the [=navigable/active document=] of a
+        [=top-level traversable=] and propagate to descendant documents
+        </li>

New text adopts 'top-level traversable', but nearby text still references 'top-level browsing context' (see line 964). For consistency with modern HTML terminology, consider updating that older occurrence to 'top-level traversable' or aligning terminology across the spec.

> +        <li>Events only fire on a [=document=] that is [=Document/fully active
+        descendant of a top-level traversable with user attention=]
+        </li>
+        <li>Additional [=Document/visibility state=] checks provide defense in
+        depth against hidden documents
+        </li>
+        <li>Events originate from the [=navigable/active document=] of a
+        [=top-level traversable=] and propagate to descendant documents

[nitpick] Editorial nits in this list: (1) add terminal periods for consistency with surrounding prose; (2) 'defense in depth' is typically hyphenated as 'defense-in-depth' in spec text; (3) fix the unresolved Bikeshed link in 935–936 as noted above by splitting into defined terms.
```suggestion
        <li>Events only fire on a [=document=] that is a [=Document/fully active descendant of a top-level traversable=] with [=user attention=].

        </li>
        <li>Additional [=Document/visibility state=] checks provide defense-in-depth against hidden documents.

        </li>
        <li>Events originate from the [=navigable/active document=] of a [=top-level traversable=] and propagate to descendant documents.
```

-- 
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
https://github.com/w3c/screen-orientation/pull/266#pullrequestreview-3348125396
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.

Message ID: <w3c/screen-orientation/pull/266/review/3348125396@github.com>