Clarification Request: gd_req__saf_linkage_check, gd_req__sec_linkage_check

The requirements [gd_req__saf_linkage_check](https://eclipse-score.github.io/process_description//main/process_areas/safety_analysis/guidance/safety_analysis_process_reqs.html#gd_req__saf_linkage_check) and [gd_req__sec_linkage_check](https://eclipse-score.github.io/process_description//main/process_areas/security_analysis/guidance/security_analysis_process_reqs.html#gd_req__sec_linkage_check) say we shall link to an "architecture view".

There is no definition of an "architecture view". The closest I can find is [wp__component_arch](https://eclipse-score.github.io/process_description//main/process_areas/architecture_design/architecture_workproducts.html#wp__component_arch) and [wp__feature_arch](https://eclipse-score.github.io/process_description//main/process_areas/architecture_design/architecture_workproducts.html#wp__feature_arch) which would make ~6 types into architecture views.

Currently docs-as-code has an arbitrary restriction of which views are allowed within [tool_req__docs_saf_attrs_violates](https://eclipse-score.github.io/docs-as-code/main/internals/requirements/requirements.html#tool_req__docs_saf_attrs_violates), which probably came from discussions with experts... or it is plain wrong / outdated. It does not reflect the process requirements.

---

Can you please support clarifying which links are allowed here?

Start by comparing gd_req__saf_linkage_check and gd_req__sec_linkage_check with wp__component_arch and wp__feature_arch in the process documentation. Then inspect tool_req__docs_asf_attrs_violates and determine which architecture-view links the requirements permit. Done means the allowed links are explicitly clarified and the documented restriction reflects that decision.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.