Thanks for bringing this up,
@abit!
tl;dr:
BSIP-26 will change how the refunding of limit order creation fee works when the order is cancelled. Currently, the refund always returns the fee in BTS, even if it was originally paid in some other asset through the asset's fee pool. The motivation for this change is that this behaviour has more than once been abused to "sell" an asset for BTS.
BSIP-27 is meant to solve a problem that is created through BSIP-26. Currently, half of the asset creation fee is deposited into the fee pool - and there is no way to get these funds out again. The fee refund mentioned above could be used as a workaround for this, but that will no longer be possible after BSIP-26 has been implemented.
----
I think BSIP-26 is a good idea and I support it.
I think BSIP-27 is unnecessary and can be replaced by a simple change of the asset creation logic - i. e. the asset creation fee should be reduced, and the automatic funding of the fee pool upon creation should be removed.