Major Beginning in Section 4, 4.3.2 Plan, the following language appears:
"...has the following, general representation:"
Since section 4 is a normative section, is the "general representation" normative?
This was prompted in part because the same formatting is used for 5.16.4 Required JSON Format Resource, "...is defined as..." and I assume there it really IS normative. Literally that format/values is required. Yes?
Are you using "general representation" because some of these items may have key/value pairs not defined by CAMP but locally?
Hmmm, ah, but these aren't "representations" are they? These are content models with required and optional key/value pairs, along with data types.
Suggestion: don't say "general representations" but rather: 5.17 type_definition Resource: This resource is a sub-type of the collection resource and is defined as: (here appears the content model)