Don't write that model and class are the same

[HansOlsson]

Closes #1345
Might discuss at the design meeting.

[henrikt-ma]

Right, this is the basic fix for #1345.

The change made me wonder, however, if this table is supposed to be of normative or non-normative kind. To me, it looks a bit like a mix of normative statements and more vague statements about intended purpose. If the table is meant to be normative, I find the new wording for model too vague. If the table is meant to be non-normative, I would suggest at least making the intention of the table more clear in the preceding paragraph.

[HansOlsson]

Right, this is the basic fix for #1345.

The change made me wonder, however, if this table is supposed to be of normative or non-normative kind. To me, it looks a bit like a mix of normative statements and more vague statements about intended purpose. If the table is meant to be normative, I find the new wording for model too vague. If the table is meant to be non-normative, I would suggest at least making the intention of the table more clear in the preceding paragraph.

I agree that clearing up that would be clear; but that will need more discussion.

It might also be that it should be a mix, and then we should make that clear, e.g.: Purpose (non-normative) and Restrictions/Enhancements (normative). However, it might also be that the normative-part is a duplicate of some other text, and thus we could view it as non-normative here.