Starting incorporating feedback

Author: Viicos

peps/pep-9995.rst

@@ -16,11 +16,11 @@ Resolution:
 Abstract
 ========
 
-:pep:`589` defines a `class-based <https://typing.readthedocs.io/en/latest/spec/typeddict.html#class-based-syntax>`_ and a
-:ref:`functional syntax <typing:typeddict-functional-syntax>` to create typed
-dictionaries. In both scenarios, it requires defining a class or assigning to
-a value. In some situations, this can add unnecessary boilerplate, especially
-if the typed dictionary is only used once.
+:pep:`589` defines a :ref:`class-based <typing:typeddict-class-based-syntax>`
+and a :ref:`functional syntax <typing:typeddict-functional-syntax>` to create
+typed dictionaries. In both scenarios, it requires defining a class or
+assigning to a value. In some situations, this can add unnecessary boilerplate,
+especially if the typed dictionary is only used once.
 
 This PEP proposes the addition of a new inlined syntax, by subscripting the
 :class:`~typing.TypedDict` type::
@@ -114,6 +114,16 @@ return the same type::
     T1 = TypedDict('T1', {'a': int})
     T2 = TypedDict[{'a': int}]
 
+Typing specification changes
+----------------------------
+
+The inlined typed dictionary syntax adds a new valid location for
+:term:`type expressions <typing:type expression>`. As such, the specification
+on :ref:`valid locations <typing:valid-types>` will need to be updated, most
+likely by adding a new item to the list:
+
+    * The definitions of the fields in the inlined typed dictionary syntax
+
 
 Backwards Compatibility
 =======================
@@ -190,7 +200,7 @@ While this would avoid having to import :class:`~typing.TypedDict` from
   parametrization overloads. On ther other hand, :class:`~typing.TypedDict` is
   already a :term:`special form <typing:special form>`.
 
-* If fufure work extends what inlined typed dictionaries can do, we don't have
+* If future work extends what inlined typed dictionaries can do, we don't have
   to worry about impact of sharing the symbol with :class:`dict`.