or will it be noted at the knee wall that it may only be 80 not 100cm high, and then the development plan is approved?
I rather don't believe that. It also slightly changes volumes / heating demand calculations. And usually people would want to adjust the roof pitch instead of getting 20 cm less room height linearly in the sloped area.
So I just don't want to waste time unnecessarily with multiple rounds.
Then I would call first: for a "yes" this way is probably not binding enough, but a "no" in the sense of "this is about principle, we define the Franconian character of the building appearance by the parameter midi knee wall height" should also be clearly communicated verbally.
The latter is a common motive to fix such knee wall heights – especially where the ridge height is not so stingy, so it's apparently less about the building volume and primarily about the knee wall itself, which is to be limited.
Then this limitation is gladly regarded as a central architectural folklore factor ;-)