--- a/cover.html	Tue Mar 03 17:48:06 2015 -0800
+++ b/cover.html	Thu Apr 23 16:40:22 2015 -0700
@@ -1398,7 +1398,13 @@
         <dt>1. No changes to text content</dt>
         <dd>These changes include fixing broken links, style sheets or invalid markup.</dd>
         <dt>2. Corrections that do not affect conformance</dt>
-        <dd>Editorial changes or clarifications that do not change the technical content of the specification.</dd>
+        <dd>Changes that reasonable implementers would not interpret as changing architectural or interoperability requirements or their
+          implementation.&nbsp; Changes which resolve ambiguities in the specification are considered to change (by clarification) the
+          implementation requirements and do not fall into this class.</dd>
+        <dd>Examples of changes in this class are correcting non-normative code examples where the code clearly conflicts with normative
+          requirements, clarifying informative use cases or other non-normative text, fixing typos or grammatical errors where the change
+          does not change implementation requirements. If there is any doubt or dissent as to whether requirements are changed, such changes
+          do not belong to this class..</dd>
         <dt>3. Corrections that do not add new features</dt>
         <dd>These changes <em class="rfc2119">may</em> affect conformance to the specification. A change that affects conformance is one
           that:
@@ -1645,22 +1651,17 @@
       <p>An erratum is resolved by an informative, "proposed" correction generated by the Working Group. A correction becomes part of the
         Recommendation by the process for Revising a Recommendation described in the next section.</p>
       <h4 id="revised-rec">7.7.2 Revising a Recommendation</h4>
-      <p class="issue"><a href="http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/152">Issue-152</a> concerns a change made in <a href="http://www.w3.org/2014/Process-20140801/#revised-rec">Process2014</a>
-        that requires Edited Recommendations consisting solely of “editorial changes” to go through an additional step, publication as a
-        Proposed Recommendation, prior to publication as a Recommendation. There are two aspects of this issue: (1) whether “editorial
-        change” is sufficiently well defined that it can be validate by a simple process (as it was in <a href="http://www.w3.org/2005/10/Process-20051014/">Process2005</a>)
-        and (2) whether patent licensing considerations should require all potential Recommendations to have a Call for Exclusions on their
-        content. See the <a href="http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/152">issue entry</a> and its associated notes and
-        emails for additional detail on the discussion.</p>
       <p>A Working group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request republication of a Recommendation, or W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em>
         republish a Recommendation, to make corrections that do not result in any changes to the text of the specification.</p>
       <p><a href="#editorial-change">Editorial changes</a> to a Recommendation require no technical review of the proposed changes. A
-        Working Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request publication of a <a href="#rec-pr">Proposed Recommendation</a> or W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em>
-        publish a <a href="#rec-pr">Proposed Recommendation</a> to make this class of change without passing through earlier maturity
-        levels. Such publications <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be called a <dfn>Proposed Edited Recommendation</dfn>.</p>
+        Working Group, provided there are no votes against the resolution to publish <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request publication of a
+        <a href="#rec-pr">Proposed Recommendation</a> or W3C <em class="rfc2119">may</em> publish a <a href="#rec-pr">Proposed
+          Recommendation</a> to make this class of change without passing through earlier maturity levels. Such publications <em class="rfc2119">may</em>
+        be called a <dfn>Proposed Edited Recommendation</dfn>.</p>
       <p>To make corrections to a Recommendation that produce <a href="#substantive-change">substantive changes</a> but do not add new
-        features, a Working Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request publication of a <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a>,
-        without passing through earlier maturity levels.</p>
+        features, or where there were votes against publishing the corrections directly as a <a href="#rec-pr">Proposed Recommendation</a>,
+        a Working Group <em class="rfc2119">may</em> request publication of a <a href="#last-call">Candidate Recommendation</a>, without
+        passing through earlier maturity levels.</p>
       <p>In the latter two cases, the resulting Recommendation <em class="rfc2119">may</em> be called an <dfn id="rec-edited">Edited
           Recommendation</dfn>.</p>
       <p>When requesting the publication of an edited Recommendation as described in this section, in addition to meeting the requirements