Further wording improvements

Author: Dani-Hub

xml/issue4498.xml

@@ -78,11 +78,15 @@ we say `#3` reads `#2`, which together forms the below modification order
 #3 ≤ #2 ≤ #3
 </pre></blockquote>
 <p>
-According to the second bullet of the definition of the (non-strict) total order, we can get `#3` &le; `#3`,
-which is also valid according to the first bullet. Then we instead use the third bullet to claim `#3` = `#2`
-in that valid total order.  However, `#3` and `#2` are different modifications, so that the total order is 
-not possible, which is quite indirect. It's a bit overcomplicated for reasoning. 
-The definition of single total order says
+According to the second bullet of the definition of the (non-strict) total order, we can get `#3 = #3`, 
+which is also valid according to the first bullet. Then we instead use the third bullet to claim 
+`#3 = #2` in that valid total order. However, when we get `#3 = #2` according to the non-strict total 
+order in the above example, it's unclear what `=` means here, since we didn't define what `=` means 
+between two modifications in the modification order. Whether the total order is valid depends on how 
+`=` intended to mean for two modifications in a non-strict total order. This is quite indirect and 
+is a bit overcomplicated for reasoning. 
+<p/>
+The definition of strict single total order says
 </p>
 <blockquote style="border-left: 3px solid #ccc;padding-left: 15px;">
 <p>