Hi Tom,
Some comments/requests.
For "can be broadly applied", can we clarify by adding "(and thus should only be used when a broad interpretation is actually intended)".
For:
Hubert pointed out a category error in the proposed wording change for the codecvt facets; "code point" is used where "code unit" would be more appropriate.
the description of the category error that was raised should be something like:
"the first bullet is a description of the artifacts produced by an encoding, not of an encoding itself; the second bullet names an encoding: both bullets should be written such that they can be easily read as specifying encodings"
Thanks,
Hubert Tong