Existing Wording
Resources that are contained inline also "inherit" context from their parent resource. For instance, if the parent resource contains a "subject", and the contained resource also has a subject element defined, but does not specify any subject, a processing application may infer that the subject is the same. Note, however, that such inferences are specific to a particular circumstance. There is no rule, for instance, that the meaning of the "subject" element is the same in both parent and contained resources

Proposed Wording
Resources that are contained inline may also "inherit" context from their parent resource. For instance, if the parent resource contains a "subject", and the contained resource also has a subject element defined, but does not specify any subject, a processing application may infer that the subject is the same. Note, however, that such inferences are specific to a particular circumstance. There is no rule, for instance, that the meaning of the "subject" element is the same in both parent and contained resources

Comments
The first sentence and the last seem to be contradictory. If the contained resource inherits from the parent resource, then isn't the subject the same? If so, why does the last sentence say that the meaning of the subject is not necessarily the same? It's worse to have an "uncertain" feature (inheritance) than to not have it at all. Why not just say that the subject IS the same unless the contained resource has a specific different subject defined. It would also help to give an example of where the contained resource has a different subject.

Grahame's Comments
agree