BIP3: Address several minor issues from review

bip-0003.md

@@ -195,7 +195,7 @@ do not need to adhere to a specific convention.
 * A **Specification BIP** defines a set of technical rules affecting the interoperability of implementations. The
   distinguishing feature of a Specification BIP is that it can be implemented, and implementations can be compliant with
   it. Specification BIPs should come with or refer to a reference implementation and preferably provide test vectors.
-* An **Informational BIP** describes a Bitcoin design issue, provides general guidelines or other information to the
+* An **Informational BIP** describes a Bitcoin design issue, or provides general guidelines or other information to the
   Bitcoin community.
 * A **Process BIP** describes a process surrounding Bitcoin, or proposes a change to (or an event in) a process. Process
   BIPs are like Specification BIPs, but apply to topics other than the Bitcoin protocol and Bitcoin implementations.
@@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ Proposals are also not ready for number assignment if they duplicate efforts, di
 unfocused or too broad, fail to provide proper motivation, fail to address backward compatibility where necessary, or
 fail to specify the feature clearly and comprehensively. Reviewers and BIP editors should provide guidance on how the
 proposal may be improved to progress toward readiness. Pull requests that are proposing off-topic or unserious ideas or
-have stopped making progress may be closed.
+that have stopped making progress may be closed.
 
 When the proposal is ready and has been assigned a number, a BIP editor will merge it into the BIPs repository. After the
 BIP has been merged to the repository, its main focus should no longer shift significantly, even while the authors may
@@ -369,15 +369,15 @@ file.
 It occasionally becomes necessary to transfer ownership of BIPs to new owners. In general, it would be preferable to
 retain the original authors of the transferred BIP, but that is up to the original authors. A good reason to transfer
 ownership is because the original authors no longer have the time or interest in updating it or following through with
-the BIP process, or have fallen off the face of the 'net (i.e., are unreachable or not responding to email). A bad reason
+the BIP process, or are unreachable or unresponsive. A bad reason
 to transfer ownership is because someone doesn't agree with the direction of the BIP. The community tries to build
 consensus around a BIP, but if that's not possible, rather than fighting over control, the dissenters should supply a
 competing BIP.
 
 If someone is interested in assuming ownership of a BIP, they should send an email asking to take over, addressed to the
 original authors, the BIP Editors, and the Bitcoin Development Mailing List. If the authors do not respond in a timely
 manner (e.g., two weeks), the BIP editors will make a unilateral decision whether to appoint the applicants as
-[Shepherds](#authors-and-shepherds) (which may be amended should the original authors make a delayed reappearance).
+[Authors or Shepherds](#authors-and-shepherds) (which may be amended should the original authors make a delayed reappearance).
 
 ## BIP Licensing