Two small typo fixes (#253)

doc/md_src_files/040_stakeholders-scope.md

@@ -150,7 +150,7 @@ The [*Mission Impact*](#mission-impact) could be increased when a disaster recov
 A mitigation that successfully changes the value of a decision point may shift the priority of further action to a reduced state. If applying a mitigation reduces the priority to *defer*, the deployer may not need to apply a remediation, if later, it becomes available. Table 3 displays the action priorities for the deployer, which are similar to the supplier case.
 
 In a later section, the different types of impacts are defined and then implemented in the decision trees as examples of how the various impacts affect the priority.
-For now, assume the decision points are ordered as: [*Exploitation*](#exploitation); [*Exposure*](#exposure); [*Utility*](#utility); and *Human Impact*](#human-impact).
+For now, assume the decision points are ordered as: [*Exploitation*](#exploitation); [*Exposure*](#exposure); [*Utility*](#utility); and [*Human Impact*](#human-impact).
 In this order, an [_active_](#exploitation) state of [*Exploitation*](#exploitation) will never result in a *defer* priority.
 A [_none_](#exploitation) state of [*Exploitation*](#exploitation) (no evidence of exploitation) will result in either *defer* or *scheduled* priority—unless the state of [*Human Impact*](#human-impact) is [_very high_](#human-impact), resulting in an *out-of-cycle* priority.
 

doc/md_src_files/080_workedExample.md

@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ However, since most of the hospital’s clients have not installed the app, and
 According to the fictional pilot scenario, “Our mission dictates that the first and foremost priority is to contribute to human welfare and to uphold the Hippocratic oath (do no harm).” The continuity of operations planning for a hospital is complex, with many MEFs. However, even from this abstract, it seems clear that “do no harm” is at risk due to this vulnerability. A mission essential function to that mission is each of the various medical devices works as expected, or at least if a device fails, it cannot actively be used to inflict harm. Unsolicited insulin delivery would mean that MEF “fails for a period of time longer than acceptable,” matching the description of MEF failure. The question is then whether the whole mission fails, which does not seem to be the case. The recovery of MEF functioning is not affected, and most MEFs (the emergency services, surgery, oncology, administration, etc.) would be unaffected. Therefore, we select [*MEF failure*](#mission-impact) and move on to ask about safety impact.
 
 This particular pilot study used SSVC version 1.
-In the suggested deployer tree for SSVC version 2.1, mission and safety impact would be used to calculate the overall [*Human Impact*](#human-impat), and [*Automatable*](#automatable) would need to be answered as well.
+In the suggested deployer tree for SSVC version 2.1, mission and safety impact would be used to calculate the overall [*Human Impact*](#human-impact), and [*Automatable*](#automatable) would need to be answered as well.
 Conducting further studies with the recommended version 2.1 Deployer tree remains an area of future work.
 In the pilot study, this information is conveyed as follows: