Fix notes

meetings/2024/LDM-2024-07-17.md

@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ can break collection expressions because we don't have a betterness tiebreaker a
 a different preferred span type than the rest of the language.
 
 Discussion in LDM showed a general reluctance to go with the narrow proposal, and we much preferred the version that applied better conversion from element recursively to solve this problem. That version
-gets us closer to unification with `params` collections and is more complete. While we do think this will be a problem in .NET 9, we're hopeful that we can use `OverloadResolutionPriorityAttribute` to solve
+gets us closer to unification with `params` collections and is more complete. While we do think this more complete version will ship later than .NET 9, we're hopeful that we can use `OverloadResolutionPriorityAttribute` to solve
 the BCL issues. We'll therefore take this back and verify that `OverloadResolutionPriorityAttribute` can solve this in a way that is acceptable; if it can't, then we can pick this back up and make a decision
 on what to do here in the short term, or whether we should pull the methods from the BCL for .NET 9.
 

meetings/2024/LDM-2024-07-22.md

@@ -21,7 +21,7 @@ We started today by looking at the latest proposed changes for extensions. There
 * How will the format work for local functions?
 * We don't think that function pointers are necessary to support right now; extensions already have limited interactions with pointer types in general. If we can come up with specific scenarios, we could look
   at them at that point.
-* We talked briefly about simply upgrading the `Type` format to allow encoding, however that runs into the issue that the extension types would not satisfy type constraints. Any solution that involves concrete
+* We talked briefly about simply upgrading the `Type` format to allow encoding type parameters. However, that runs into the issue that the extension types would not satisfy type constraints. Any solution that involves concrete
   `Type` instances would likely break reflection in some way.
 * We also briefly discussed whether we need to invest in a way to shrink the amount of metadata we emit. For now, we don't think we need to. The concern with nullable was that every member across an entire project
   would implicitly get new attributes. We're nowhere near that level here.