The latest series is really enjoyable. With the Dristighteten, I can appreciate that it was a one-off but if it is contemporary with Dreadnought I'm intrigued that the Swedish designers went straight to turrets with the secondaries, rather than sighting in casements. I'm probably answering my own question here, as the weight of the 210mm shell would make unassisted handling very difficult, so I'm seeing turrets with all the required hoists etc. Of course, the R.N. opted for 6-in secondaries in casements to ward off destroyers, but that was a later development anyway.
Forgive me if my observation is too obvious:
Wouldn't the construction of the various British and French pre- and semi-dreadnoughts with single and twin 9.2" and 6.4" or 7.6" (respectively) guns in turret/barbette provide enough example for the Swedish to follow? Several of these ships would already be in service and under construction by this time, making their existence common knowledge... and the theory behind their designs as well.
As the Swedish navy already has 210mm gun turrets in service (and thus the machinery necessary to work the guns in production) it seems to make sense that they would see these examples and make a similar evolutionary leap using the easiest solution at hand. The leap might appear greater for them- but most of the hard work was done by someone else... so they didn't need to duplicate it.