Fixes some misspelled words, grammar and comprehension (ethereum#3296)

* Fixes some misspelled words, grammar and comprehension

- Replaces hyphen with colons where applicable
- Introduces em-dashes wherever necessary
- Fixes typos
- A better sentence structure for a few long sentences

* Update EIPS/eip-1.md

Co-authored-by: Micah Zoltu <micah@zoltu.net>

Co-authored-by: Micah Zoltu <micah@zoltu.net>

EIPS/eip-1.md

@@ -21,12 +21,14 @@ For Ethereum implementers, EIPs are a convenient way to track the progress of th
 
 There are three types of EIP:
 
-- A **Standards Track EIP** describes any change that affects most or all Ethereum implementations, such as a change to the network protocol, a change in block or transaction validity rules, proposed application standards/conventions, or any change or addition that affects the interoperability of applications using Ethereum. Furthermore Standard EIPs can be broken down into the following categories. Standards Track EIPs consist of three parts, a design document, implementation, and finally if warranted an update to the [formal specification].
-  - **Core** - improvements requiring a consensus fork (e.g. [EIP-5](./eip-5.md), [EIP-101](./eip-101.md)), as well as changes that are not necessarily consensus critical but may be relevant to [“core dev” discussions](https://github.com/ethereum/pm) (for example, [EIP-90], and the miner/node strategy changes 2, 3, and 4 of [EIP-86](./eip-86.md)).
-  - **Networking** - includes improvements around [devp2p] ([EIP-8](./eip-8.md)) and [Light Ethereum Subprotocol], as well as proposed improvements to network protocol specifications of [whisper] and [swarm].
-  - **Interface** - includes improvements around client [API/RPC] specifications and standards, and also certain language-level standards like method names ([EIP-6](./eip-6.md)) and [contract ABIs]. The label “interface” aligns with the [interfaces repo] and discussion should primarily occur in that repository before an EIP is submitted to the EIPs repository.
-  - **ERC** - application-level standards and conventions, including contract standards such as token standards ([ERC-20](./eip-20.md)), name registries ([ERC-137](./eip-137.md)), URI schemes, library/package formats, and wallet formats.
+- A **Standards Track EIP** describes any change that affects most or all Ethereum implementations, such as—a change to the network protocol, a change in block or transaction validity rules, proposed application standards/conventions, or any change or addition that affects the interoperability of applications using Ethereum. Standards Track EIPs consist of three parts—a design document, an implementation, and (if warranted) an update to the [formal specification]. Furthermore, Standards Track EIPs can be broken down into the following categories:
+  - **Core**: improvements requiring a consensus fork (e.g. [EIP-5](./eip-5.md), [EIP-101](./eip-101.md)), as well as changes that are not necessarily consensus critical but may be relevant to [“core dev” discussions](https://github.com/ethereum/pm) (for example, [EIP-90], and the miner/node strategy changes 2, 3, and 4 of [EIP-86](./eip-86.md)).
+  - **Networking**: includes improvements around [devp2p] ([EIP-8](./eip-8.md)) and [Light Ethereum Subprotocol], as well as proposed improvements to network protocol specifications of [whisper] and [swarm].
+  - **Interface**: includes improvements around client [API/RPC] specifications and standards, and also certain language-level standards like method names ([EIP-6](./eip-6.md)) and [contract ABIs]. The label “interface” aligns with the [interfaces repo] and discussion should primarily occur in that repository before an EIP is submitted to the EIPs repository.
+  - **ERC**: application-level standards and conventions, including contract standards such as token standards ([ERC-20](./eip-20.md)), name registries ([ERC-137](./eip-137.md)), URI schemes, library/package formats, and wallet formats.
+
 - A **Meta EIP** describes a process surrounding Ethereum or proposes a change to (or an event in) a process. Process EIPs are like Standards Track EIPs but apply to areas other than the Ethereum protocol itself. They may propose an implementation, but not to Ethereum's codebase; they often require community consensus; unlike Informational EIPs, they are more than recommendations, and users are typically not free to ignore them. Examples include procedures, guidelines, changes to the decision-making process, and changes to the tools or environment used in Ethereum development. Any meta-EIP is also considered a Process EIP.
+
 - An **Informational EIP** describes an Ethereum design issue, or provides general guidelines or information to the Ethereum community, but does not propose a new feature. Informational EIPs do not necessarily represent Ethereum community consensus or a recommendation, so users and implementers are free to ignore Informational EIPs or follow their advice.
 
 It is highly recommended that a single EIP contain a single key proposal or new idea. The more focused the EIP, the more successful it tends to be. A change to one client doesn't require an EIP; a change that affects multiple clients, or defines a standard for multiple apps to use, does.
@@ -46,9 +48,9 @@ REVERT (0xfe)
 
 Parties involved in the process are you, the champion or *EIP author*, the [*EIP editors*](#eip-editors), and the [*Ethereum Core Developers*](https://github.com/ethereum/pm).
 
-Before you begin writing a formal EIP, you should vet your idea. Ask the Ethereum community first if an idea is original to avoid wasting time on something that will be be rejected based on prior research. It is thus recommended to open a discussion thread on [the Ethereum Magicians forum] to do this, but you can also use [one of the Ethereum Gitter chat rooms], [the Ethereum subreddit] or [the Issues section of this repository]. 
+Before you begin writing a formal EIP, you should vet your idea. Ask the Ethereum community first if an idea is original to avoid wasting time on something that will be rejected based on prior research. It is thus recommended to open a discussion thread on [the Ethereum Magicians forum] to do this, but you can also use [one of the Ethereum Gitter chat rooms], [the Ethereum subreddit] or [the Issues section of this repository]. 
 
-In addition to making sure your idea is original, it will be your role as the author to make your idea clear to reviewers and interested parties, as well as inviting editors, developers and community to give feedback on the aforementioned channels. You should try and gauge whether the interest in your EIP is commensurate with both the work involved in implementing it and how many parties will have to conform to it. For example, the work required for implementing a Core EIP will be much greater than for an ERC and the EIP will need sufficient interest from the Ethereum client teams. Negative community feedback will be taken into consideration and may prevent your EIP from moving past the Draft stage.
+Once the idea has been vetted, your next responsibility will be to present (by means of an EIP) the idea to the reviewers and all interested parties, invite editors, developers, and the community to give feedback on the aforementioned channels. You should try and gauge whether the interest in your EIP is commensurate with both the work involved in implementing it and how many parties will have to conform to it. For example, the work required for implementing a Core EIP will be much greater than for an ERC and the EIP will need sufficient interest from the Ethereum client teams. Negative community feedback will be taken into consideration and may prevent your EIP from moving past the Draft stage.
 
 ### Core EIPs
 
@@ -96,13 +98,13 @@ Each EIP should have the following parts:
 
 - Preamble - RFC 822 style headers containing metadata about the EIP, including the EIP number, a short descriptive title (limited to a maximum of 44 characters), and the author details. See [below](./eip-1.md#eip-header-preamble) for details.
 - Abstract - A short (~200 word) description of the technical issue being addressed.
-- Motivation (*optional) - The motivation is critical for EIPs that want to change the Ethereum protocol. It should clearly explain why the existing protocol specification is inadequate to address the problem that the EIP solves. EIP submissions without sufficient motivation may be rejected outright.
+- Motivation (*optional) - A motivation section is critical for EIPs that want to change the Ethereum protocol. It should clearly explain why the existing protocol specification is inadequate to address the problem that the EIP solves. EIP submissions without sufficient motivation may be rejected outright.
 - Specification - The technical specification should describe the syntax and semantics of any new feature. The specification should be detailed enough to allow competing, interoperable implementations for any of the current Ethereum platforms (cpp-ethereum, go-ethereum, parity, ethereumJ, ethereumjs-lib, [and others](https://github.com/ethereum/wiki/wiki/Clients).
 - Rationale - The rationale fleshes out the specification by describing what motivated the design and why particular design decisions were made. It should describe alternate designs that were considered and related work, e.g. how the feature is supported in other languages. The rationale may also provide evidence of consensus within the community, and should discuss important objections or concerns raised during discussion.
 - Backwards Compatibility - All EIPs that introduce backwards incompatibilities must include a section describing these incompatibilities and their severity. The EIP must explain how the author proposes to deal with these incompatibilities. EIP submissions without a sufficient backwards compatibility treatise may be rejected outright.
 - Test Cases - Test cases for an implementation are mandatory for EIPs that are affecting consensus changes. Other EIPs can choose to include links to test cases if applicable.
 - Reference Implementation - An optional section that contains a reference/example implementation that people can use to assist in understanding or implementing this specification.
-- Security Considerations - All EIPs must contain a section that discusses the security implications/considerations relevant to the proposed change. Include information that might be important for security discussions, surfaces risks and can be used throughout the life cycle of the proposal. E.g. include security-relevant design decisions, concerns, important discussions, implementation-specific guidance and pitfalls, an outline of threats and risks and how they are being addressed. EIP submissions missing the "Security Considerations" section will be rejected. An EIP cannot proceed to status "Final" without a Security Considerations discussion deemed sufficient by the reviewers.
+- Security Considerations - All EIPs must contain a section that discusses the security implications/considerations relevant to the proposed change. Include information that might be important for security discussions, surfaces risks and can be used throughout the life-cycle of the proposal. E.g. include security-relevant design decisions, concerns, important discussions, implementation-specific guidance and pitfalls, an outline of threats and risks and how they are being addressed. EIP submissions missing the "Security Considerations" section will be rejected. An EIP cannot proceed to status "Final" without a Security Considerations discussion deemed sufficient by the reviewers.
 - Copyright Waiver - All EIPs must be in the public domain. See the bottom of this EIP for an example copyright waiver.
 
 ## EIP Formats and Templates
@@ -147,7 +149,7 @@ Headers requiring dates will always do so in the format of ISO 8601 (yyyy-mm-dd)
 
 #### `author` header
 
-The `author` header lists the names, email addresses or usernames of the authors/owners of the EIP. Those who prefer anonymity may use a username only, or a first name and a username. The format of the author header value must be:
+The `author` header lists the names, email addresses or usernames of the authors/owners of the EIP. Those who prefer anonymity may use a username only, or a first name and a username. The format of the `author` header value must be:
 
 > Random J. User <address@dom.ain>
 
@@ -203,7 +205,7 @@ EIPs may also have a `superseded-by` header indicating that an EIP has been rend
 
 ## Linking to other EIPs
 
-References to other EIPs should follow the format `EIP-N` where `N` is the EIP number you are referring to.  Each EIP that is referenced in an EIP **MUST** be accompanied by a relative markdown link the first time it is referenced, and **MAY** be accompaniede by a link on subsequent references.  The link **MUST** always be done via relative paths so that the links work in this GitHub repository, forks of this repository, the main EIPs site, mirrors of the main EIP site, etc.  For example, you would link to this EIP with `[EIP-1](./eip-1.md)`.
+References to other EIPs should follow the format `EIP-N` where `N` is the EIP number you are referring to.  Each EIP that is referenced in an EIP **MUST** be accompanied by a relative markdown link the first time it is referenced, and **MAY** be accompanied by a link on subsequent references.  The link **MUST** always be done via relative paths so that the links work in this GitHub repository, forks of this repository, the main EIPs site, mirrors of the main EIP site, etc.  For example, you would link to this EIP with `[EIP-1](./eip-1.md)`.
 
 ## Auxiliary Files
 
@@ -213,7 +215,7 @@ Images, diagrams and auxiliary files should be included in a subdirectory of the
 
 It occasionally becomes necessary to transfer ownership of EIPs to a new champion. In general, we'd like to retain the original author as a co-author of the transferred EIP, but that's really up to the original author. A good reason to transfer ownership is because the original author no longer has the time or interest in updating it or following through with the EIP process, or has fallen off the face of the 'net (i.e. is unreachable or isn't responding to email). A bad reason to transfer ownership is because you don't agree with the direction of the EIP. We try to build consensus around an EIP, but if that's not possible, you can always submit a competing EIP.
 
-If you are interested in assuming ownership of an EIP, send a message asking to take over, addressed to both the original author and the EIP editor. If the original author doesn't respond to email in a timely manner, the EIP editor will make a unilateral decision (it's not like such decisions can't be reversed :)).
+If you are interested in assuming ownership of an EIP, send a message asking to take over, addressed to both the original author and the EIP editor. If the original author doesn't respond to the email in a timely manner, the EIP editor will make a unilateral decision (it's not like such decisions can't be reversed :)).
 
 ## EIP Editors