No, but I think it's an unnecessary addition to the format that attempts to fix a problem that shouldn't be/can't be solved in the first place (i.e. making it friendly for humans to directly work with the raw CSV or manually add valid entries in Excel).

The focus should remain on this being a bare-bones software-to-software interchange format.

That it is reasonably not too terrible for a human to look up a single one-off value is a nice bonus. But I think any human requirement beyond that is impossible to satisfy.

I wouldn't worry too much about human readability so much as human usability.

The proposed two-column format allows for a trivial CTRL-F to locate any specific desired one-off info, should someone want/need to find something directly in the raw CSV file (most likely looking up by addr or by label text).

And I don't think it's a reasonable use-case/design constraint to try to insure that the format be easy for humans to directly edit or add to themselves. Manually logging inputs or outputs is going to be incredibly error-prone regardless of how the format is defined. Excel or Google Sheets is fine as a convenience viewer, but manual editing only really makes sense within some kind of dedicated Bitcoin-savvy helper UI that can look up each txid entered, etc.

Ongoing management via direct human edits isn't practical (or at least wouldn't be a recommended practice) so let's not agonize over it.

Recorded a discussion / analysis of your ICO:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pzaP7uiWUFw

As you'll see we're pretty enthusiastic about the concept but have some serious concerns. Would love to hear the team's response to our criticisms and correct anything we got wrong.