Use dfn elements for defining terms

[Jym77]

Showcasing how we could use dfn elements for defining terms in definitions and conditional lists.
Some of the changes are not really needed but used to illustrate some possibilities 😄

In order to ensure name uniqueness (the definitions are included inside the rules), I namespace the IDs in definition with the definition key, as far as I understand the : in an ID shouldn't be a problem. (otherwise we can just namespace with _). IDs in rules are namespaced by the rule ID.

Pros:

• Semantically correct 😁
• Can link to the precise part of the definition that is of interest.
• Can backlink to a precise condition in a conditional list.

Closes issue(s):

• closes Wrap defined term in dfn elements #1664

Need for Call for Review:
This will require a 1 week Call for Review (should be purely cosmetic, but could be touching a lot of stuff).

---

Pull Request Etiquette

When creating PR:

• Make sure you're requesting to pull a branch (right side) to the develop branch (left side).
• Make sure you do not remove the "How to Review and Approve" section in your pull request description

After creating PR:

• Add yourself (and co-authors) as "Assignees" for PR.
• Add label to indicate if it's a Rule, Definition or Chore.
• Link the PR to any issue it solves. This will be done automatically by referencing the issue at the top of this comment in the indicated place.
• Optionally request feedback from anyone in particular by assigning them as "Reviewers".

When merging a PR:

• Close any issue that the PR resolves. This will happen automatically upon merging if the PR was correctly linked to the issue, e.g. by referencing the issue at the top of this comment.

How to Review And Approve

• Go to the “Files changed” tab
• Here you will have the option to leave comments on different lines.
• Once the review is completed, find the “Review changes” button in the top right, select “Approve” (if you are really confident in the rule) or "Request changes" and click “Submit review”.
• Make sure to also review the proposed Call for Review period. In case of disagreement, the longer period wins.

[Jym77]

This (and following changes in that rule) is not really needed (and actually makes the description worse, in that case).
This is to illustrate the possibility to backlink to the exact condition in a list that is under consideration.

[Jym77]

Putting this back on Agenda so we can discuss (follow up to https://www.w3.org/2021/10/14-act-r-minutes.html#t05) and decide whether it is something we want to do or not…

[Jym77]

Add doc on writing defs and listed conditions.

[Jym77]

Namespace ids in rules by the rule ID.

[kengdoj]

No objection to this change inside the rules.

This is a while ago, but I recall discussion of a single ACT glossary and taking definitions out of rules. Is that no longer being considered?

[Jym77]

Call for Reviews ends on February 10.

[Jym77]

Call for Review has ended, merging.