--- a/tr.html	Mon Feb 17 02:03:36 2014 +0100
+++ b/tr.html	Mon Feb 17 19:10:00 2014 +0100
@@ -25,7 +25,7 @@
             height="48" width="72"></a> </p>
       <h1 class="title" id="title">Recommendation Track Process draft proposal</h1>
       <h2 id="draft-shorthand-status"><abbr title="World Wide Web Consortium"></abbr>Editors'
-        Draft 14 February 2014</h2>
+        Draft 17 February 2014</h2>
       <dl>
         <dt>Current active version:</dt>
         <dd><a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html">http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html</a></dd>
@@ -36,7 +36,7 @@
           <a href="http://www.yandex.ru">Яндекс</a>—<a href="http://yandex.com">Yandex</a></dd>
       </dl>
       <p class="copyright"> <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Copyright">Copyright</a>
-        © 2013 <a href="http://www.w3.org/"><abbr title="World Wide Web Consortium">W3C</abbr></a><sup>®</sup>
+        © 2013-2014 <a href="http://www.w3.org/"><abbr title="World Wide Web Consortium">W3C</abbr></a><sup>®</sup>
         (<a href="http://www.csail.mit.edu/"><abbr title="Massachusetts Institute of Technology">MIT</abbr></a>,
         <a href="http://www.ercim.eu/"><abbr title="European Research Consortium for Informatics and Mathematics">ERCIM</abbr></a>,
         <a href="http://www.keio.ac.jp/">Keio</a>, <a href="http://ev.buaa.edu.cn/">Beihang</a>),
@@ -52,10 +52,9 @@
         <p>This is a draft proposal to replace the <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/tr.html">current
             chapter 7 of the W3C process document</a> with a more effective W3C
           Specification life cycle. </p>
-        <p>This draft incorporates outstanding review comments following the
-          meeting of the W3C Advisory Board's Chapter 7 Task Force on 3 February
-          2014. In particular it fixes some errors introduced with the
-          reintroduction of Proposed Recommendation in the last draft.</p>
+        <p>This draft incorporates all known outstanding review comments. In
+          particular it fixes some errors introduced with the reintroduction of
+          Proposed Recommendation in the last draft.</p>
         <p>This introductory section (before the chapter title below) will be
           removed when this chapter is re-incorporated into the full process
           document.</p>
@@ -101,8 +100,9 @@
             considered when assessing "<a href="#implementation-experience">adequate
               implementation experience</a>".</li>
           <li>Instead of relying on a Last Call publication for adequate review
-            there is a requirement for a Working Group to demonstrate "<a href="#wide-review">wide
-              review</a>", while leaving them to achieve this as they see fit.</li>
+            Working Groups must demonstrate "<a href="#wide-review">wide review</a>"
+            to publish a spec as Candidate Recommendation, while leaving them to
+            achieve this as they see fit.</li>
           <li>There is a stronger emphasis (without creating new formal
             requirements) on getting review and testing implementation as early
             as possible. How to do this is left to Working Groups to determine.</li>
@@ -110,8 +110,8 @@
             together. Some of the requirements are therefore enforced earlier in
             the process.</li>
           <li>Advisory Committee review now begins at the same time as Candidate
-            recommendation, and ends 4 weeks after publication as a Proposed
-            Recommendation.&nbsp;</li>
+            recommendation, and ends no less than 4 weeks after publication as a
+            Proposed Recommendation.&nbsp;</li>
           <li>The Director is required to address dissenting AC review comments
             <strong>publicly</strong>, 2 weeks <em>before</em> publication of a
             Recommendation.</li>