All raw file formats are just storage containers for data of various types, such as the raw RGB data, EXIF, and so on, as well as private notes from the camera. The DNG format is no different in this regard, and whatever a manufacturer wants to write into it, it can store. I don't know why Hasselblad hasn't developed their DNG support to the same level. I suppose it is a question of development time and cost.
With the M9, the corrections are limited to cyan and vignetting correction, but this is necessary only because the M lenses often come very close to the sensor and project the light at dramatic angles. The S2 shouldn't need anything like the amount of cyan correction, being a new system with a very large diameter bayonet, but I can imagine Leica correcting the vignetting.
Hasselblad uses the DAC corrections slightly differently, in that they chose a middle road, with known aberrations uncorrected, store the relevant data, and then correct in post, for example barrel distortion in the 28mm. They analyzed the market and determined it to be more cost effective this way. Leica has made a statement that they will not be doing this type of corrections in software, but rather in the optical designs. This of course brings up the cost. Both are valid approaches.
I don't personally see Leica's challenges lying in the optical design or corrections. Leica is perhaps the world's leader in these areas. I think Leica's main technical challenge will be to build a compelling and effective software pipeline with Lightroom. I primarily use Lightroom, but still need to jump to C1 for some shots. I find that the white balance, noise reduction and colours are just better in C1. Leica has to make do with Lightroom for the S2.
