--- a/tr.html	Mon Jan 20 00:56:13 2014 +0100
+++ b/tr.html	Mon Jan 20 01:13:15 2014 +0100
@@ -401,6 +401,8 @@
       mechanical approval is normally fairly automatic, whereas for later stages
       there is generally a formal review meeting to ensure the requirements have
       been met before Director's approval is given.</p>
+    <p>Note that for a First Public Working Draft there is no "previous maturity
+      level".</p>
     <h5 id="substantive-change">7.2.2.1 Substantive Change</h5>
     <p class="issue">This subsection will probably get merged into the later
       section on changes, as per <a href="http://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/72">ISSUE-72</a></p>
@@ -619,6 +621,9 @@
         as the basis of a Request for Recommendation,</li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show adequate <a href="#implementation-experience">implementation
           experience</a>,</li>
+      <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> document how the testing and
+        implementation requirements identified as part of the transition to
+        Candidate Recommendation have been met,</li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that the document has received <a
           href="#wide-review">wide review,</a></li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> show that all issues raised during the
@@ -627,9 +632,6 @@
       <li><em class="rfc2119">must </em>identify any substantive issues raised
         since the close of the review period by parties other than Advisory
         Committee representatives,</li>
-      <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> document how the testing and
-        implementation requirements identified as part of the transition to
-        Candidate Recommendation have been met,</li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">must</em> identify where errata are tracked, and</li>
       <li><em class="rfc2119">may</em> remove features identified in the
         Candidate Recommendation document as "at risk" without repeating the