Actually, there is a DTV, but it has been “suspended” for the time being, while members of the community work on assembling a larger body of more specific use cases and exchange requirements.
One of the issues that was brought up by the initial release of the DTV was that it was too general and yet not comprehensive enough. The problem is that “design transfer” via IFC might be easy for some concepts/objects but very difficult for others (mainly due to the lack of detail in the schema definition of the object). There are cases where the current schema falls short in defining the geometric features of and object, for parametric transfer, such as Stairs, Curtain Wall, Roofs, Railings, complex MEP objects, etc. And if a user wants a “complete” or comprehensive model transferred from one platform to another, the detail and parametric nature of that transfer will be wildly different across a range of objects.
I suspect what we may have to consider is a “DTV” template, but then create more discrete DT “micro-MVDs” based on specific uses cases (e.g. architectural wall design/placement -> structural design, MEP openings/provisions for voids -> architectural/structural wall modeling, etc…). The components of these micro-MVDs might be interchangeable, and allow re-aggregation in other use cases, but the resulting exchanges may need to be at a less comprehensive scope in order to accomplish high-fidelity and detail.
Right now, the focus is on the Reference View while the further work on the DTV is being tackled.