Update ERC-7518: Move to Review

[rajatwasan]

Reference implementation: https://github.com/zoniqx/erc7518_reference Discussion: https://ethereum-magicians.org/t/erc-7518-dynamic-compliant-interop-security-token-dycist Supersedes: https://github.com/ethereum/ERCs/pull/67

[eip-review-bot]

✅ All reviewers have approved.

[rajatwasan]

• Line 21: Somewhat awkward to start a sentence with "Build upon of". Perhaps "This standard builds upon ERC-1155 by introducing partitions..." Updated to “This standard builds upon ERC-1155 by introducing partitions…”.

• Line 181: "ie current ..." -> "(i.e. current ...)" Corrected

• Line 212: "MUST check if ..." doesn't actually have an observable effect. Does it revert if it wasn't previously restricted? transfer restriction checks revert if conditions are not met.

• Line 305: I don't think a contract can "consider implications". Is this an instruction to implementers or users, and if so, it should be in Security Considerations. Moved language on “consider implications” to Security Considerations

• Line 351+: ERC1155 -> ERC-1155 Standardized to “ERC-1155”.

• Lines 461-466: This content belongs in Motivation, because it is providing justification for the standard as a whole. The specification section should exclusively describe the observable behaviour of the implementation. Moved justification to Motivation.

• Line 470: We prefer an SVG if you can provide one, but a PNG is fine if you cannot. Replaced
• Line 486: Similarly, this looks like Motivation to me. Restructured
• Lines 496-540: Definitely Motivation. While examples can exist in the Specification section to demonstrate how an implementation should behave, these examples are too high level to be useful to implementers in that way. Restructured

[github-actions[bot]]

The commit e7d06393fca28de73705d1568d3b7b9aad1169c9 (as a parent of 9fb1812b0eba7c46c677d26b19b1dfc7d436701c) contains errors. Please inspect the Run Summary for details.