A few more minor edits. (osrf#78)

Signed-off-by: Chris Lalancette <clalancette@openrobotics.org>

humble/README.md

@@ -30,18 +30,19 @@ In order to be considered for this report, RMW implementations needed to meet a
 
 Two RMW implementations currently meet this minimum bar: `rmw_cyclonedds_cpp` based on Cyclone DDS and `rmw_fastrtps_cpp` based on Fast RTPS.
 From here on out, Cyclone DDS will be used synonymously with `rmw_cyclonedds_cpp` and Fast RTPS will be used synonymously with `rmw_fastrtps_cpp` unless otherwise specified.
-This report evaluates these two DDS implementations along with their RMW implementations for ROS 2, namely Cyclone DDS and Fast RTPS (this is now called Fast DDS, but this report will continue to refer to it as Fast RTPS).
+Note that Fast RTPS is now known as Fast DDS, but for historical reasons this report will continue to refer to it as Fast RTPS.
+This report evaluates these two DDS implementations along with their RMW implementations for ROS 2.
 
 The application performance and community engagement is measured objectively by Open Robotics along 4 axes:
 
 * [Build Farm Performance Metrics](#BuildFarm) - this dataset covers basic RMW performance in terms of memory, CPU utilitization, and lost messages using a simplified network under optimal conditions
-* [REP-2004 Code Quality Data](#CodeQuality) - this simple table represents the [REP-2004](https://www.ros.org/reps/rep-2004.html) code quality standards as implemented for both the RMW and the underlying DDS implementation
+* [REP-2004 Code Quality Data](#CodeQuality) - this simple table represents the [REP-2004](https://www.ros.org/reps/rep-2004.html) code quality standards as implemented for both the RMWs and DDS implementations
 * [GitHub User Statistics](#GitHubStats) - this section looks at GitHub community engagement data over the preceding six months for both the RMWs and DDS implementations
-* [User Survey Results](#Survey) - this section presents the results of a survey of the ROS 2 community asking them about the overall end-user experience
+* [User Survey Results](#Survey) - this section presents the results of a survey of the ROS 2 community asking about the overall end-user experience
 
-The RMW providers were each asked a series of questions that are current concerns of the ROS 2 TSC.
+In the [DDS Provider Reponses](#DDSProviderResponse) section, each of the RMW providers were asked a series of questions that are current concerns of the ROS 2 TSC.
 The questionnaire that was provided is available [here](dds_provider_question_template.md).
-The results in each of the responses are necessarily biased, and because the hardware and software used for each providers response is different, no direct comparison is possible.
+The responses from the providers are necessarily biased, and because the hardware and software used for each providers response is different, no direct comparison is possible.
 However, the manner in which the providers responded to the questionnaire should give some insights into how they are thinking about the problems that ROS 2 users are facing.
 
 # <a id="ExecutiveSummary"></a> Executive Summary
@@ -142,7 +143,7 @@ However, comparing the results to the [2020 report](../galactic/README.md), it i
 In terms of messages received both RMW implementations appear to perform well up until the 1MB message size.
 After that point, we see a divergence in the implementations.
 Cyclone DDS starts dropping messages at the 2MB size, and continues to drop more messages as the size increases.
-Fast RTPS async receives all messages at the 2MB size, and starts dropping messages after that.
+Fast RTPS async drops a small number of messages at the 1MB and 2MB size, but starts dropping a large number of messages after that.
 Fast RTPS sync mode receives all messages up until 4MB size, and starts dropping messages after that.
 It should be noted that compared to the [2020 report](../galactic/README.md), both implementations now deal with 2MB sizes better than before, with Fast RTPS showing a larger improvement.
 
@@ -157,7 +158,8 @@ After that, the Cyclone DDS CPU usage goes up quickly with the amount of data be
 The Fast RTPS async CPU usage spikes at 2MB, and then starts going down a lot more dramatically.
 In both of those cases, that is likely happening because more messages are being dropped after 2MB.
 The Fast RTPS sync CPU usage goes up at the PointCloud512k size, drops dramatically for the 1MB, 2MB, and 4MB sizes, and then spikes again for the 8MB size.
-It isn't completely clear on why that happens.
+This is an unexpected result, since CPU usage should increase as the data size goes up.
+This may be a measurement error or other problem in that particular test.
 Compared to the [2020 report](../galactic/README.md), Cyclone DDS sync and Fast RTPS async are approximately the same, with Fast RTPS sync showing a very different performance curve.
 
 # <a id="CodeQuality"></a> 2. REP-2004 Code Quality Metrics