Add Trainline Trackers Policy

[OTA-Bot]

🔎 Inspect this declaration suggestion

Bots should take care of checking the formatting and the validity of the declaration. As a human reviewer, you should check:

• The suggested document matches the scope of this instance: it targets a service in the language, jurisdiction, and industry that are part of those described for this instance.
• The service name Trainline matches what you see on the web page, and it complies with the guidelines.
• The service ID Trainline (i.e. the name of the file) is derived from the service name according to the guidelines.
• The terms type Trackers Policy is appropriate for this document: if you read out loud the terms type tryptich, you can say that “this document describes how the writer commits to handle the object for its audience”.
• Selectors are:
  • stable: as much as possible, the CSS selectors are meaningful and specific (e.g. .tos-content rather than .ab23 .cK_drop > div).
  • simple: the CSS selectors do not have unnecessary specificity (e.g. if there is an ID, do not add a class or a tag).
• Generated version is:
  • relevant: it is not just a series of links, for example.
  • readable: it is complete and not mangled.
  • clean: it does not contain navigation links, unnecessary images, or extra content.

---

If no document type seems appropriate for this document yet it is relevant to track in this instance, please check if there is already an open discussion about such a type and reference your case there, or open a new discussion if not.

Thanks to your work and attention, Open Terms Archive will ensure that high quality data is available for all reusers, enabling them to do their part in shifting the balance of power towards end users and regulators instead of spending time collecting and cleaning documents 💪

---

This suggestion has been created through the Contribution Tool, which enables graphical declaration of documents. You can load it on your local instance if you have one set up.

[Cli4d]

Thank you for making this contribution. I have reviewed it but I need a bit of clarification from the @OpenTermsArchive/core on a certain number of issues.

First I find the selectors rather complex, but it is understandable given the website is complexly structured. I had alternative selectors here. They are not perfect but I feel less complex than the original ones

{
  "name": "Trainline",
  "documents": {
    "Trackers Policy": {
      "fetch": "https://www.thetrainline.com/fr/terms/cookies",
      "select": [
        ".page-template"
      ],
      "remove": [
        ".root-PjtD4",
        ".promoBanner-wiaSq a",
        ".breadcrumb",
        ".root--MygG"
      ]
    }
  }
}

Secondly there are some issues with the generated version. Certain sections are hard to read because of the complex design of the website.

So I am leaving this comment for advise from @OpenTermsArchive/core for how to proceed with this contribution.

Thank you

[Cli4d]

After careful thought and also going through the documentation on selectors, I find the selectors you had chosen are satisfactory enough for a merge.

However the issue that remains is with regards to the readability of certain sections of the document in the generated version

[MattiSG]

Thanks @Cli4d for your attention to the resulting version! 👌
It seems that the table syntax for Markdown is either not properly generated or not properly rendered. Could you please open an issue in the engine repository referencing that one and providing the screenshot, as well as links to the version once it will have been generated? This will enable us to go back to this later 🙂
As it stands, I believe this PR can be merged. One table might not render properly but it is still valuable to track these terms. Thanks!

[Cli4d]

Sure. I'll then merge this PR and create that issue. Thank you for the clarification on how to handle this situation.