In Section 2.3.2 "File Operations", Table 2-1 is the description:

00b write from bus to slave's IFS
01b read to bus from slave's IFS

The terms "write from" and "read to" sound a little bit odd and
should be clarified

Table 2-1 is changed as follows (changed items are bold):

In order to be consistent with the remainder of the specification
on page 2-7 the term "node name" should be replaced by
"logical name".

Section 2.2.1 is changed as follows (changes are bold):

The conformance section of the Smart Transducers specification
(chapter 3 requirements and IDL) is not shaped right. It should be
expressed in terms of discrete mandatory or optional conformance
points. The name Conformance points is better suited that requirement
as this may be confused with the RFP requirements.

There are too many options to choose from in optional conformance
points, you should probably identify a few option sets that make sense
from a practical point of view.

Putting the Consolidated IDL in a separate chapter would also improve
clarity.

Also, it is customary to include a section (in the introduction)
describing how the submission adresses the mandatory and optional
points in the RFP.

In general take an other submission as an example of how conformance
statements are usually structured.

see above