Don't see what adj-no brings to the table here. Seems like the use would have to be possessive. you wouldn't call a 
talented person "人材の人"

@@ -22 +21,0 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>
@@ -28 +26,0 @@
-<pos>&adj-no;</pos>

OK. I think this is cleanest.
Re Marcus': "I don't think it was a good idea to add "人財" to all compound nouns beginning with "人材" - I think they appear often enough and with the same meanings to warrent inclusion, with a tag that they're not the right kanji.

-i've given it its own entry. AFAICT, no dictionary gives mixes the readings for those kanji
-i suspect that 人財 may be a little different, but without evidence, i'm happy with the iK

@@ -14,3 +13,0 @@
-<k_ele>
-<keb>人才</keb>
-</k_ele>
@@ -22,3 +18,0 @@
-</r_ele>
-<r_ele>
-<reb>じんさい</reb>

I don't think 人才 should be marked as such - it is in 
both daijs and daijr.
_
I feel that 人財 could perhaps be its own entry because 
it doesn't seem 100% synonymous with 人材 because of the 
very positive connotations of the second character. I 
don't think it was a good idea to add "人財" to all 
compound nouns beginning with "人材"

@@ -16 +15,0 @@
-<ke_inf>&iK;</ke_inf>

Daijr (says 人財 is ateji and slang), n-grams (have 人財 at about 2% of 人材)

I'm suggesting tagging them both as wrong.

@@ -11,0 +12 @@
+<ke_inf>&iK;</ke_inf>
@@ -14,0 +16 @@
+<ke_inf>&iK;</ke_inf>