Editorial improvements

Fixes typos and uses preferred XML text elements

Author: Dani-Hub

xml/issue4255.xml

@@ -12,34 +12,32 @@
 <p>
 The standard currently requires that constructing <code>move_only_function</code>
 from empty <code>copyable_function</code>, creates an non-empty <code>move_only_function</code>,
-that contains an empty <code>copyable_function</code> as the target. For exampe:
-<code>
+that contains an empty <code>copyable_function</code> as the target. For example:
+</p>
+<blockquote><pre>
 std::copyable_function&lt;int(int)&gt; ce;
 std::move_only_function&lt;int(int)&gt; me(ce);
-</code>
+</pre></blockquote>
+<p>
 We require that invoking <code>me(1)</code> is undefined behavior (as it leads to call to the
 <code>ce(1)</code>), however it cannot be detected in the user code, as <code>me != nullptr</code>
 is true.
 </p>
-
 <p>
-We should require that the <code>move_only_function(F&amp;&amp; f)</code> constructor to create an
-empty object, if <code>f</code> is instantiation of of <code>copyable_function</code> and
-<code>f == nullptr</code> is true, i.e. f does not contain target object.
+We should require the <code>move_only_function(F&amp;&amp; f)</code> constructor to create an
+empty object, if <code>f</code> is an instantiation of <code>copyable_function</code> and
+<code>f == nullptr</code> is true, i.e. `f` does not contain target object.
 </p>
-
 <p>
 This simplifies implementing avoidance of double wrapping per <sref ref="[func.wrap.general]"/> p2,
-as transfering the target produces empty functor.
+as transferring the target produces an empty functor.
 </p>
-
 <p>
 The <code>copyable_function</code> cannot be constructed from <code>move_only_function</code>,
-as it requires functor to be copyable. Invkoing an empty <code>std::function</code> has well
+as it requires functor to be copyable. Invoking an empty <code>std::function</code> has well
 defined behavior (throws <code>bad_function_call</code>), and wrapping such object into
-other functors should reproduce that behavior
+other functors should reproduce that behavior.
 </p>
-
 </discussion>
 
 <resolution>
@@ -56,13 +54,15 @@ template&lt;class F&gt; move_only_function(F&amp;&amp; f);
 </pre>
 <blockquote>
 [&hellip;]
-<p>-8- <i>Postconditions:</i>: <tt>*this</tt> has no target object if any of the following hold:</p>
-<ul>
-  <li><p>(8.1) <tt>f</tt> is a null function pointer value, <del>or</del></p></li>
-  <li><p>(8.2) <tt>f</tt> is a null member pointer value, or</p></li>
-  <li><p>(8.2) <tt>remove_cvref_t&lt;F&gt;</tt> is a specialization of the <tt>move_only_function</tt>
-       <ins>or <tt>copyable_function</tt></ins> class template, and <tt>f</tt> has no target object.</p></li>
-</ul>
+<p>
+-8- <i>Postconditions:</i>: <tt>*this</tt> has no target object if any of the following hold:
+</p>
+<ol style="list-style-type: none">
+<li><p>(8.1) &mdash; <tt>f</tt> is a null function pointer value, <del>or</del></p></li>
+<li><p>(8.2) &mdash; <tt>f</tt> is a null member pointer value, or</p></li>
+<li><p>(8.2) &mdash; <tt>remove_cvref_t&lt;F&gt;</tt> is a specialization of the <tt>move_only_function</tt>
+     <ins>or <tt>copyable_function</tt></ins> class template, and <tt>f</tt> has no target object.</p></li>
+</ol>
 </blockquote>
 </blockquote>
 

xml/issue4256.xml

@@ -20,12 +20,12 @@ struct M
 </pre>
 <p>
 The constructor of <code>function_ref&lt;void()&gt;</code> from <code>nontype_t</code>
-is considered to be valid candidate
-(is_constructible_v&lt;function_ref&lt;void()&gt;, nontype_t&lt;M{}&gt;&gt; is <code>true</code>),
-despite the fact that the corresponding invocation of template argument object, that is const lvalue,
-is ill-formed. As consequence we produce hard error from inside of this constructor.
+is considered to be valid candidate 
+(<code>is_constructible_v&lt;function_ref&lt;void()&gt;, nontype_t&lt;M{}&gt;&gt;</code> 
+is <code>true</code>), despite the fact that the corresponding invocation of template 
+argument object, that is const lvalue, is ill-formed. As consequence we produce a hard 
+error from inside of this constructor.
 </p>
-
 <p>
 This is caused by the fact that for constructors with non-type <code>auto f</code> parameter,
 we are checking if <code><i>is-invocable-using</i>&lt;F&gt;</code> is <code>true</code>,
@@ -59,10 +59,10 @@ template&lt;auto f, class U&gt; constexpr function_ref(nontype_t&lt;f&gt;, U&amp
 <blockquote>
 <p>-12- Let <tt>T</tt> be <tt>remove_reference_t&lt;U&gt;</tt> and <tt>F</tt> be <tt>decltype(f)</tt>.</p>
 <p>-13- <i>Constraints:</i>:</p>
-<ul>
-  <li><p>(13.1) <tt>is_rvalue_reference_v&lt;U&amp;&amp;&gt;</tt> is false, and</p></li>
-  <li><p>(13.2) <tt><i>is-invocable-using</i>&lt;<ins>const </ins>F<ins>&amp;</ins>, T <i>cv</i>&amp;&gt;</tt> is <tt>true</tt>.</p></li>
-</ul>
+<ol style="list-style-type: none">
+<li><p>(13.1) &mdash; <tt>is_rvalue_reference_v&lt;U&amp;&amp;&gt;</tt> is false, and</p></li>
+<li><p>(13.2) &mdash; <tt><i>is-invocable-using</i>&lt;<ins>const </ins>F<ins>&amp;</ins>, T <i>cv</i>&amp;&gt;</tt> is <tt>true</tt>.</p></li>
+</ol>
 [&hellip;]
 </blockquote>