It also fits the English-language meaning better.
How? We can have amendments that don't delete the entire text of a proposal. However, if I read A.3 right, there does seem to be a limitation in the current vote system that only one amendment can succeed. So, I wondered, how are orthogonal amendments handled?
From http://www.debian.org/vote/howto_proposal#amend, it looks like whether amendments are alternatives or not is the choice of the proposer, but I'm not sure whether that's written in the SRP. That page says "When the call for the vote of the proposal comes, the proposer of the original proposal calls for the vote on the amendments singly, all together or together with the original proposal".
Meanwhile, the SRP says "The person who calls for a vote states what they believe the wordings of the resolution and any relevant amendments are, and consequently what form the ballot should take. However, the final decision on the form of ballot(s) is the Secretary's - see 7.1(1), 7.1(3) and A.3(4)." 7.1(1) says the secretary takes votes; (3) says he interprets the constitution; and A.3(4) says he decides on doubted procedure. Is the HOWTO the Secretary's interpretation/decision?
It seems that unaccepted amendments are relatively rare in Debian to date.