Function type conversion mistake?

## Page

https://docs.soliditylang.org/en/v0.8.18/types.html#function-types

## Abstract

Under the sub-section "**Conversions**", it's mentioned that a function type of **A** is convertible to **B**, if **A** is _more restrictive_ than **B**.
In the examples, it says `payable` is convertible to `non-payable`. So taking `A = payable`, and `B = non-payable`, it looks contradictory in the next paragraph, which says that `non-payable` functions (B) are more restrictive than `payable` ones (A). Is this a mistake, or I'm just not getting it right?

## Pull request

No pull request made, since I'm not sure if my argument is right.

Read the Function Types page at the linked URL, focusing on the “Conversions” subsection and its examples for payable and non-payable functions. Verify whether the statements about convertibility and restrictiveness are consistent, then clarify the wording so the rule and example agree; done means the documentation no longer presents a contradiction.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.