The draft has a number of cross-references with perform quite well at increasing the readability of the materials.

However, I am puzzled by the lack, at least in the all-inclusive version, of cross-references between elements (for example) and their definitions in 3.1.1 Base DITA elements, A to Z.

You have already demonstrated the utility of cross-references even to attribute values, such as cross-references to 3.12.13.5.1 Using the -dita-use-conref-target value, which helpfully includes the target page number, and the same happens on occasion for other attributes and some values.

Puzzled that the draft doesn't supply such cross-references for all elements, attributes and attribute values in the text?

Realizing that would be an unreasonable ask of a TC with a hand edited specification but that's not the case here. It might take a little time to script the insertions but think of the time and effort such cross-referencing will save readers.

And it would make cross-referencing consistent across the draft and not leave the users wondering why it appears to be erratic.

Update: On page 570 of the comprehensive version, there is a hyperlink for outputclass but no page reference. This appears to happen several times to outputclass. I meant to mention it earlier but had lost the page reference. Fold this into the larger request for fixing references.