The “Is not limited to” refers to the concept that there will be things in the update that aren’t listed in the below 2 bullet points. I think you’re interpreting it in a way that isn’t actually stated by the actual letters of the statement.
If you want an actual dissection of it to find out the actual meanings of the letters:
Let’s look at this sentence:
We are still working on the itemization part of the update as mentioned in the Vision Statement.
Specifically:
the itemization part of the update
This explicitly says: the update will partially feature itemization. This does not say possibly. This does not say it might. This does not say that it’s contingent. This straight up, white on black, to the letter says: itemization will be a part of the update. There is no other interpretation possible. The only contingency it mentions is that it’s in testing and the dev blog they want to share is being worked on.
Notice also it says
the update
Referring UNMISTAKABLY to the update of the previous sentence, the one releasing on June 25th.
To me, this feels like less of a clarification and more of a “truth changed”. I’m fine if things change I just wish they could just level. Why the constant “oh we just worded it badly”? I’ll say, it’s pretty badly worded if the actual meaning doesn’t actually align with what’s written at all. If I tag a moderator with a slur on this forum is it also just a wording mistake and I can get away with saying “sorry, I worded it badly, here’s what I meant all along:”?
Once again it’s just annoying that they can’t talk normally and say things changed (or that they messed up and said it was gonna be for sure part of it when it’s not). It’s always my mistake for reading it wrong. It’s my mistake for interpreting it wrong. Actual gaslighting. I know how to read English man.