clarify

diff --git a/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn b/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn
index d09b0c7c9c4bd6a066dd09c013232c26eb54ba1e..267e439332e817c4c3d98ce61a3080f9b4f719b4 100644 (file)
--- a/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn
+++ b/isa_conflict_resolution.mdwn
@@ -552,7 +552,8 @@ So to summarise:
   cannot take a back seat.  If it does, clear historical precedent shows
   100% what the outcome will be (1).
 * Making the mvendorid and marchid CSRs WARL solves the problem in a
-  minimal to zero-disruptive fashion.
+  minimal to zero-disruptive backwards-compatible fashion that provides
+  indefinite transparent *forwards*-compatibility.
 * The retro-fitting cost onto existing implementations (even though the
   specification has not been finalised) is zero to negligeable
   (only changes to words in the specification required at this time:
@@ -567,10 +568,10 @@ So to summarise:
 * Compliance Testing is straightforward and allows vendors to seek and
   obtain *multiple* Compliance Certificates with past, present and future
   variants of the RISC-V Standard (in the exact same processor,
-  simultaneously), in order to support legacy customers and provide
-  same customers with a way to avoid "impossible-to-make" decisions that
-  throw out ultra-expensive multi-decade proprietary legacy software at
-  the same as the (legacy) hardware.
+  simultaneously), in order to support end-customer legacy scenarios and
+  provide the same with a way to avoid "impossible-to-make" decisions that
+  throw out ultra-costly multi-decade-investment in proprietary legacy
+  software at the same as the (legacy) hardware.
 
 -------