Meta: Change "Difficult" to "Expensive" in Stage 2 entrance criterion

[sffc]

No description provided.

[leobalter]

Nit pick: s/simplicity/complexity

The adjectives for Simple and simplicity are often seen as very subjective and relative to individual experiences.

The meaning of complexity here is not much different but would avoid triggering these issues, I hope so.

Suggested change

	1. Features in Intl must bring something to the table that a third-party library wouldn't be able to do with the same level of efficiency, performance, and simplicity. The champion can cite a heavy locale data dependency or a complex algorithm to satisfy this criterion.
	1. Features in Intl must bring something to the table that a third-party library wouldn't be able to do with the same level of efficiency, performance, and complexity. The champion can cite a heavy locale data dependency or a complex algorithm to satisfy this criterion.

[leobalter]

I'm not blocking the approval on my nit picking. It seems good to land one way or another.

[ryzokuken]

LGTM either way (wrt @leobalter's suggestion).

[zbraniecki]

suggestion(optional): since we're revisiting it, would you be open to adjust the same level ... part?

As of now this sounds like if a proposal is at least on par with the cost of third party, it is passing the bar. I believe our intent here is to say that it has to be significantly more expensive to do X with third-party to pass the bar on extending the standard.

[sffc]

I rewrote the whole sentence to read:

Features in Intl must be significantly more efficient and less complex than a third-party library implementing the same feature.

Does this address your concern @zbraniecki ?

[ryzokuken]

ping @zbraniecki

[zbraniecki]

lgtm! Thank you for addressing my comment