Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- provenance:privacy:data_subject_rights [2026/09/16 11:20] – Generic review log (11.4); correct the Kempen Table 1 figures, the samarin 160->109 keying, the dangling section pointer and two stale entries; say plainly that ~395 of the 471 verdicts are a screen, not a reading. Authored by Claude karel.kubicek.claude
+++ provenance:privacy:data_subject_rights [2026/09/16 11:22] (current) – Close the two open verification items: chromestatus confirmed independently, all 8 citekeys and the six extraction-quote rows re-verified. Authored by Claude karel.kubicek.claude
@@ Line 940: / Line 940: @@
 | The two red links to ''provenance:privacy:data_subject_rights'' look like a stale cache, because the page "returns HTTP 200". | **Rejected.** DokuWiki serves the themed error page with HTTP 200 for a page that does not exist; ''export_raw'' on a missing page returns HTML rather than an error. The provenance page genuinely did not exist at review time — it is this one. |
 | ''abramova2023_anatomy'' is missing from ''dsr/citekeys.json''. | **Accepted as accurate, not fixed.** That map is built from the population only, and the entry is an out-of-population aside. The report script's new page-vs-verdicts check reads the map in the direction that matters (citekey → population paper) and throws on a page row it cannot resolve, so an incomplete map cannot hide a bad row. |
+**Re-review after the fixes.** The citations reviewer was re-run on the changed page and confirmed all four of its own findings fixed, and checked the material added afterwards: the Landgericht Berlin and CalOPPA quotes, AB 566's text and chapter number, the EDPB CEF 2026 figures, both statutory-deadline quotes, and the two rescoped "no paper in this population" claims against {[martino2022_revisiting]} and {[take2024_expect]}. All matched. It also independently re-derived **R 17 / S 12 / M 10 / D 10 / O 2** and the seven-of-twelve claim from the verdict file. Two notes from it, one accepted and one rejected:
+  * **Accepted:** the EDPB CEF 2026 URL 301-redirects to a slightly different slug. It resolves 200 with ''-L''; a future check that omits ''-L'' will see the redirect and should follow it rather than record a failure.
+  * **Rejected as a finding, recorded as a limitation:** it could not verify the ''chromestatus'' feature entry or the Colorado ''coag.gov/uoom/'' page, because ''api.chromestatus.com'' refused its TLS connection and both pages render client-side for ''WebFetch''. Both **were** fetched successfully during the run — chromestatus through its JSON API (HTTP 200, 11,059 bytes) and ''coag.gov/uoom/'' with ''curl'' and a browser User-Agent (HTTP 200, 81,392 bytes) — and both are stored as dated byte snapshots under ''dsr/external/'', which is what ''dsr_quotecheck.py'' checks the published quotes against. This is the case the snapshot design exists for: a source that one tool can read and another cannot is not a source that has gone away. **Closed after publication:** the reviewer's own delegated check later reached the chromestatus JSON and confirmed every claim independently — the feature name, the motivation string as an exact substring, the //Proposed// stage, the absence of a milestone on all four stages, the 2026-01-02 update timestamp, and the non-Google creator address. The same pass re-verified all 8 citekeys on this page and all six rows of the extraction-quote table in §6, including the two awkward ones: {[farooqi2020_canarytrap]}'s table paraphrase and {[rupp2022_leave]}'s column splice. ''coag.gov/uoom/'' remains unreadable to that toolchain and readable to ''curl''; the snapshot stands.
 ==== 11.3 Figures against the script (model: sonnet) ====