Spectre once bubbled...
Huh? What's this mean Mike?
It means that I can't require the mastery of skills that aren't normally performance requirements of a class. I have some latitude in how I define mastery of skills that are required though.
Some examples...
An OW class does require a student to swim neutrally buoyant for a minimum distance in confined water. Some might have a student swim quickly accross the pool and call it good if they don't touch the bottom. OTOH, I would have students adjust weight , balance and body position to achieve good trim. I would then have them in buddy teams move about using good finning technique doing stops, turns and depth changes. Technically it could be argued that both methods meet standards but which one is more like diving.
OTOH, I can't introduce a skill like lift bag deployment in this class. Why? PADI doesn't introduce this skill outside of their new tec class. IANTD introduces it in the Deep Diver class and the Advanced Nitrox class. In the above example even though my class looks very different from the average OW class I don't teach anything in the class that is in theory not already a requirement. Namely kicks, buoyancy control, ascents, decents and other skills like air sharing.
Another example...
Once in a while I have someone come to me and say "I don't want a tech class and I already have done (or don't want to do) an advanced class but would like you to help me learn some of this technique stuff. What do I do. I can't just take someone in the water and teach. I can't make things up as I go. Everything I do must be within the standards for some existing class. The insurance company covers me while teaching within PADI or IANTD standards. They do not cover me when teaching a Mike Ferrara special, just made it up today class. What standards do I have that I can work with? Well not much but what I use is the Peak Performance Buoyancy standards. Now before you laugh let me point out that this class covers finning technique, weighting, trim ect. I will admit that my class may look a bit different but it is within the letter of the standards. I can get a bunch of really good stuff in there but I don't dare toss ini things like liftbag deployment because nothing remotely like it is ever mentioned in the standards. I can address things like equipment configuration, buddy skills and dive planning in every class I teach because they are requirements in the standards of every class I teach.
If I turn out a student with solid skills and a clean functional equipment configuration do I have any desire to call it DIR? Absolutely not because it isn't and even if the match is good I am not qualified to define what is or is not DIR. Do I care? No. Are many of the elements common? Yes.
It isn't my fault that many obuse the holes in the standards or that the agency fails to streighten them out. The poor reputation gained from it is just another roadblack we have to deal with.
although I think I have quite a clear idea of what DIR is. 
