Revert spec to REC state

[marcoscaceres]

This PR gets us back to where we were when we went to REC. It cherry-picks all the editorial and xref fixes.

Additionally:

• Reverts spec to no longer having a version number
• Reclaims the payment-request namespace on /TR/
• Excludes [[Spec] Relax user activation requirement for show() ](d9352e2) - hi @stephenmcgruer, @rsolomakhin

---

Preview | Diff

[rsolomakhin]

Can someone please remind me what we've decided to do with the user activation requirement? Have we decided to keep it or remove it?

[ianbjacobs]

@rsolomakhin,

For process reasons we want to create a "CR Snapshot" that is the Recommendation unchanged, except for the status. Then we will immediately (as in the same day probably) publish a "CR Draft" that will include (1) all the changes since the Rec including removal of the user activation requirement and (2) the address stuff restored, except using contact picker API instead of defining a dictionary in PR API. I hope that sounds ok!

[rsolomakhin]

@rsolomakhin,

For process reasons we want to create a "CR Snapshot" that is the Recommendation unchanged, except for the status. Then we will immediately (as in the same day probably) publish a "CR Draft" that will include (1) all the changes since the Rec including removal of the user activation requirement and (2) the address stuff restored, except using contact picker API instead of defining a dictionary in PR API. I hope that sounds ok!

This plan SGTM!

[rsolomakhin]

LGTM based on Ian's description of the plan to add back the User Activation Requirement immediately after merging this pull request.