--- a/tr.html	Mon Jan 20 15:40:51 2014 +0100
+++ b/tr.html	Wed Jan 22 12:53:23 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 20 January 2014</h2>
+        Draft 22 January 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>
@@ -87,31 +87,35 @@
             Lifecycle (chapter 7)</a>"</p>
         Major changes:
         <ul>
-          <li>There is a requirement that Working groups <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
-            document known implementation for all transitions</li>
-          <li>Implementation requirements are not simply listed as "2
-            interoperable implementations", instead a new sections gives
-            guidance on what is considered when assessing "<a href="#implementation-experience">adequate
-              implementation experience</a>".</li>
+          <li>New requirements that Working groups <em class="rfc2119">should</em>
+            document known implementation and expected next steps for all
+            transitions</li>
+          <li>If W3C closes a Working Group, they <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
+            republish its unfinished work as Notes. </li>
+          <li>Implementation requirements for passing beyond Candidate Recommendation
+            are not simply listed as "2 interoperable implementations", instead
+            a new sections gives guidance on what is 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>", leaving them to implement review processes as they
-            see fit.</li>
+              review</a>", while leaving them to achieve this as they see fit.</li>
           <li>Last Call and Candidate Recommendation have been collapsed
             together. Some of the requirements are therefore enforced earlier in
             the process.</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>
-          <li>Proposed Recommendation is no longer a separate step. Advisory
-            Committee review now begins at the same time as Candidate
+          <li>Proposed Recommendation is no longer a separate step. (This may be
+            reversed, per <a href="https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/84">ISSUE-84</a>)</li>
+          <li>Advisory Committee review now begins at the same time as Candidate
             recommendation, and ends 4 weeks after the Working group has
             provisional approval for a Request to publish as a W3C
-            Recommendation. (This may be reversed, per <a href="https://www.w3.org/community/w3process/track/issues/84">ISSUE-84</a>)</li>
-          <li>If W3C closes a Working Group, they <em class="rfc2119">must</em>
-            republish its unfinished work as Notes. </li>
+            Recommendation.&nbsp;</li>
           <li>The Director is required to address AC review comments <strong>publicly</strong>,
             2 weeks <em>before</em> publication of a Recommendation.</li>
+          <li>Errata cannot be made normative except by republishing a
+            Recommendation or a Revised Recommendation</li>
           <li>And it is in HTML5</li>
         </ul>
         <p>Editorially, I have tried to rationalize requirements and clarify who
@@ -680,9 +684,8 @@
           explain the reasons for that decision. </span></li>
     </ul>
     <p>Possible next steps:</p>
+    <p>A W3C Recommendation normally retains its status indefinitely. However it</p>
     <ul>
-      <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>