It's been a while since we saw some activity on this mailing list. However, outside of this mailing list, some of us had several discussions with various DTR members and PIT working group members regarding the scope and data model for capturing type records. The goal of our discussions with the PIT working group members was to align their definition of types with ours. In the end, I'd say that we were successful in aligning our vision and scope - if you ignore a few terminology differences. The latest revision of the DTR data model (revision 2.0) is in the file depot here: https://rd-alliance.org/filedepot?cid=101&fid=506
The section at the end of the document lists issues and items we would have to consider in future revisions of the data model. That section includes one or two items that PIT working group already assumes to be present in their types. Since type records are open-ended, it is still possible to have PIT type definitions recorded in a DTR instance. However, the DTR may not have standard vocabulary for capturing some of those values yet.
CNRI plans to release a DTR instance in a week or so that implements the revision 2.0 of the data model. Any quick feedback will be included in the new prototype as far as possible, but please send in feedback whenever you can for discussion with the group and to inform future releases.
Giridhar, Christophe, and Larry