While I understand the motivation for such a new presentation format, I am confused as to why choosing to use the 8-page template for it. Especially given that this 8-page version will not be made public (which, BTW, makes a bit redundant the part in the proposal that says “Please note that no revisions are possible after submission”). Also, the 1-page summary should be part of the submission and reviewed as well, because it will go into the proceedings.
Regarding the review process: will reviewers know that a paper is intended to be a PR instead of a RR? Reviewing a PR may be very different to reviewing a RR, given that the 8-page manuscript will not be part of the proceedings. It might make little sense to suggest rejecting a PR, for instance, because of missing methodological details, because after all these details may be in the journal paper and it might be more productive to give suggestions for the oral presentation instead.