[dmitrizagidulin]

From discussions in issues #54 and #55.

• Renames TemplateRenderMethod to SuiteRenderMethod (keeps optional superclass RenderMethod open, per @iherman's preferences)
• The card render suite is now the summary render suite.
• The renderSuite table entry now states the value is a plain JSON string with exact case-sensitive matching, lists data, html, nfc (though see Folding nfc into a static render suite needs a dispatch mechanism #77) as the values this spec defines, and requires implementations to ignore entries with unrecognized values. (See issue Registry for renderSuite values #75 for related discussion)
• Each suite section got a "Use of Common Properties" table

---

Preview | Diff

[dlongley]

I don't think this is the right name, but will +1 this PR to keep things moving while we still work out a better name.

[msporny]

Approving because it's an iteration in the right direction, not because I agree with the name of the card, or think details such as "template" for NFC makes sense. I presume other PRs will follow that aligns that stuff w/ consensus of the group.

[TallTed]

I suggest opening tracking issues for each of the reasons (raised by @msporny, @dlongley, and/or thought of by others) why this PR is imperfect, to help ensure that they are indeed addressed in follow-up PRs.

[iherman]

The section on the former card rendering is inconsistent. It uses summary in the title now, but subsections, objects, etc, are still referred to as card, and, in some examples, we are talking about data.

I am fine using the term summary for now, as part of the more general change proposed here (although the resolution on the final naming is still missing). But we should be consistent.

[dmitrizagidulin]

@iherman I updated the rest of the card usages to summary for consistency.

[dmitrizagidulin]

Several approvals, merging for momentum and to continue the discussion.

[TallTed]

I see this PR has been merged. I have not seen tracking issues for the concerns with this PR, as mentioned in #76 (comment), as "raised by @msporny, @dlongley, and/or thought of by others". Have those concerns been addressed elsewhere?