Add BoursoBank Imprint

[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 BoursoBank matches what you see on the web page, and it complies with the guidelines.
• The service ID BoursoBank (i.e. the name of the file) is derived from the service name according to the guidelines.
• The terms type Imprint 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 and all looks good. However I am not quite convinced on the terms type being an imprint. Though I can't pin it to any other terms type as well.
So I will proceed to merge this contribution and will revert to the @OpenTermsArchive/core for their thoughts on the same.

Thank you for making this contribution

[MattiSG]

Indeed, this page contains many different terms types. Only block 1 is “imprint”. Block 2 is “terms of service”, etc.
I think it would have been better to withhold from merging in this case, as the type is indeed misleading.
Thanks for pinging us! 😊

[Cli4d]

Hi @MattiSG

Thank you for providing some advice regarding this contribution. However given that I had already merged it, should I revert the changes of this pull request?

[MattiSG]

No, I don't think it's worth reverting 🙂

[Cli4d]

So what is the best course of action in this case?

[MattiSG]

Just leave it as it is 😉 if some contributor wants to improve this later, they will 🙂