Further Editorial Comments via the OAB

[chris-little]

1. Shouldn't an Abstract provide a little more detail than this? [Some more detail added DONE]
2. Duplication of Preface, Abstract and Overview [fixed in PR#495 DONE]
3. Use Pub/Sub more and Publish-Subscribe less. [fixed consistent terminology in PR#495 DONE]
4. No Keywords [created by MetaNorma]
5. No Submitting Organizations [Inserted by MetaNorma]
6. add "Assuming connectivity or favourable DDIL conditions." to Overview [DONE]
7. Channels "interesting approach. Although this is not focused on the DDIL environment, it maybe worth considering subscription to metadata records as they are small, transportable and notify the user of changes prior to requesting them (when bandwidth is premium)" [@chris-little will do a PR for 6 and 7 DONE]
8. Payloads "OK, so you can use any encoding but GeoJSON is described below? Is it the default or an example?" [@chris-little will create a PR to clarify DONE]
9. Operation: "Does this cause a bunch of conflicts in practice or does it splinter the lineage of the messaging?" [This may be true, but probably is difficult to standardize - OGC EDR API SWG 111 rejects the comment/question]

[chris-little]

@tomkralidis I don't think we need to address these immediately, as they can be considered Public Review comments. But we may need to clarify some text.

[chris-little]

All issues addressed

[chris-little]

All addressed in recent PRs