Persistent disks proposal

A stake in the ground ... something to evolve into a working implementation.
The wording in this section is confusing. It sounds like we are saying that it would not be possible to mount a single, read-only volume for use by a pod: _"If the ReadOnly attribute is on the top level PersistentDisk struct, then a user would be forced to make 2 disk definitions in 
+json:  one for read/write and one for read-only". The second paragraph reverses the relationship and still implies that somewhere in the cluster there is a pod that does have read/write access to the volume, but it seems like that shouldn't be a requirement. So I may be completely missing something (at least 50% likely) or the wording is implying constraints that aren't really there.