chore: update ReSpec syntax and error fixes

[sidvishnoi]

I've made small focused commits, so they're easier to review and understand. Please squash and merge in the end.
Non-substantial for IPR.

---

Preview | Diff

[plehegar]

Marked as non substantive for IPR from ash-nazg.

[plehegar]

This is adding "[resource-timing]" in the set of normative references (among other additions). Not quite sure why since we already have resource-timing-2. I guess it doesn't harm anything...

[sidvishnoi]

This is adding "[resource-timing]" in the set of normative references

Updated in 3c03b8c

(among other additions)

Earlier, some were linked using href (instead of data-cite) - so those references were missing. Also, some have moved from informative to normative.

Question: current document is linked to both navigation-timing-2 as well as resource-timing-2. Only one those specs (or some other spec) should be defining it (and we should be linking to that only) - so I think that's a bug.

[plehegar]

We're using "current document" as a short end for "Window object's newest Document object". I agree that we should only have it once, probably keeping the definition in Resource Timing. Or better, we should stop exporting those definitions since they shouldn't really be used by other specs...

[sidvishnoi]

I could not find any direct definition to the term for "Window object's newest Document object". The closest I reached was this: https://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-html51-20150831/browsers.html#concept-document-window, which maps to "associated document". Why is the former being used?

[plehegar]

I think it's historical at this point. We may be able to drop "current document" entirely and use "associated document" instead. If we're willing to make that change in server-timing, we'll need to file issues against nav- and res- timings.

[marcoscaceres]

@plehegar, if you are back, friendly ping 🙏

[plehegar]

@marcoscaceres , I'd like a +1 from one of the main editors before making pull requests. Hopefully, this will get noticed next week.

[cvazac]

lgtm! thx for the cleanup!

[sidvishnoi]

@plehegar Do you want me to open issues in nav- and res- timing specs for use of "associated document"? Or this can be merged before we do that?

[marcoscaceres]

@yoavweiss, can this be merged? These are all just small syntax changes.

[yoavweiss]

LGTM

[yoavweiss]

Apologies for dropping the ball on reviewing this!