--- a/tr.html	Thu Oct 03 21:28:17 2013 +0400
+++ b/tr.html	Thu Oct 03 21:55:43 2013 +0400
@@ -373,14 +373,12 @@
       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, the Director will
-      consider who has actually reviewed the document and provided comments,
-      particularly in light of the listed dependencies, and how the Working
-      Group has solicited and responded to review. In particular, the Director
-      is likely to consider the record of requests to and responses from groups
-      identified as dependencies in the charter, as well as seeking evidence of
-      clear communication to the general public about appropriate times and
-      which content to review. </p>
-    <p>As an example, inviting review of new or significantly revised sections
+      consider who has actually reviewed the document and provided comments, the
+      record of requests to and responses from reviewers, especially groups
+      identified as dependencies in the charter, and seek evidence of clear
+      communication to the general public about appropriate times and which
+      content to review. </p>
+    <p>For example, inviting review of new or significantly revised sections
       published in Working Drafts, and tracking those comments and the Working
       Group's responses, is generally a good practice which would often be
       considered positive evidence of wide review. A recommended practice is
@@ -423,8 +421,9 @@
       should)</span> are often reluctant to make <a href="#substantive-change">substantive
       changes</a> to a mature document, <span class="new">particularly if this
       would cause significant compatibility problems due to existing
-      implementation</span>. Worthy ideas <em class="rfc2119">should</em> be
-    recorded even when not incorporated into a mature document.
+      implementation</span>. Working Groups <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
+    record substantive or interesting proposals raised by reviews but not
+    incorporated into a current specification.
     <h3>7.4 <a name="rec-advance" id="rec-advance">Advancing a Technical Report
         to Recommendation</a></h3>
     <p>W3C follows these steps when advancing a technical report to
@@ -633,7 +632,8 @@
       W3C Recommendation to other W3C groups and to the public.</p>
     <p>Possible next steps:</p>
     <ul>
-      <li>A W3C Recommendation normally retains its status forever. However it</li>
+      <li>A W3C Recommendation normally retains its status indefinitely. However
+        it</li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> be <a href="#rec-modify">republished as
           an Edited Recommendation</a>, or</li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> be <a href="#rec-rescind">rescinded</a>.</li>