--- a/tr.html	Fri Mar 07 18:31:08 2014 +0100
+++ b/tr.html	Mon Mar 10 00:15:20 2014 +0100
@@ -212,9 +212,9 @@
       should become a W3C Recommendation, while the Working Group formally
       collects  implementation experience to demonstrate that the
       specification works in practice. The next phase is a Proposed
-      Recommendation, to finalize the review of W3C Members. If W3C member
-      review agrees that a specification should be a Standard, W3C publishes it
-      as a Recommendation.</p>
+      Recommendation, to finalize the review of W3C Members. If the Director
+      determines that W3C member review supports a specification becoming a
+      Standard, W3C publishes it as a Recommendation.</p>
     <p>Groups may also publish documents as W3C Notes, typically either to
       document information other than technical specifications, such as use
       cases motivating a specification and best practices for its use, or to
@@ -326,8 +326,8 @@
         state referred to in the <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C
           Patent Policy</a> [<a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/refs.html#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>]
         as "Last Call Working Draft"</dd>
-      <dd><strong>Note:</strong> Candidate Recommendations will normally be
-        accepted as Recommendations. Announcement of a different next step <em
+      <dd><strong>Note:</strong> Candidate Recommendations are expected to be
+        acceptable as Recommendations. Announcement of a different next step <em
           class="rfc2119">should</em> include the reasons why the change in
         expectations comes at so late a stage.</dd>
       <dt id="RecsPR">Proposed Recommendation</dt>
@@ -450,7 +450,7 @@
     incorporated into a current specification.
     <h5>7.2.3.1 <a id="wide-review">Wide Review</a></h5>
     <p>The requirements for <dfn>wide review</dfn> are not precisely defined by
-      the process. The objective is to ensure that the entire set of
+      the W3C Process. The objective is to ensure that the entire set of
       stakeholders of the Web community, including the general public, have had
       adequate notice of the progress of the Working Group and thereby an
       opportunity to comment on the specification. Before approving transitions,
@@ -687,7 +687,8 @@
           href="#wide-review">wide review,</a></li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that all issues raised during the
         Candidate Recommendation review period other than by Advisory Committee
-        representatives have been <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#formal-address">formally
+        representatives acting in<br>
+        &nbsp;&nbsp; their formal AC representative role have been <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/policies.html#formal-address">formally
           addressed</a>,</li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">must </em>identify any substantive issues raised
         since the close of the Candidate Recommendation review period by parties
@@ -724,6 +725,8 @@
     <ul>
     </ul>
     <h3 id="rec-publication">7.6 W3C Recommendation</h3>
+    <p>The decision to advance a document to Recommendation is a <a href="acreview.html#def-w3c-decision">W3C
+        Decision</a>.</p>
     <p>In addition to meeting the <a href="#transition-reqs">general
         requirements for advancement</a>,</p>
     <ul>
@@ -829,7 +832,7 @@
     <p>The <a href="http://www.w3.org/Consortium/Patent-Policy">W3C Patent
         Policy</a> [<a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/refs.html#ref-patentpolicy">PUB33</a>]
       does not specify any licensing requirements or commitments for Working
-      Group Notes, only for W3C Recommendations.</p>
+      Group Notes.</p>
     <h3 id="rec-rescind">7.9 Rescinding a W3C Recommendation</h3>
     <p>W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em> rescind a Recommendation, for example
       if the Recommendation contains many errors that conflict with a later