Is it correct to say "the up-elevator position decreases the camber of the elevator"? Aft movement of the control column deflects
  the trailing edge of the elevator surface up. This is usually
  referred to as the up-elevator position. 
  The up-elevator position decreases the camber of the elevator (my emphasis)
  and creates a downward aerodynamic force, which is greater
  than the normal tail-down force that exists in straight-andlevel
  flight. The overall effect causes the tail of the aircraft
  to move down and the nose to pitch up. PHAK 6-5


This is an excerpt from PHAK on the elevator. Do you agree with the statement "the up-elevator position decreases the camber of the elevator"? I've always thought the camber of control surfaces indicates their curvature, which is designed by aircraft designers or controlled by pilots using high-lift devices, and it is the angle of attack that that changes when pilots give control inputs. So isn't it more correct to say "The up-elevator position decreases the angle of attack of the elevator"?
You're absolutely correct, camber equals curvature. The camber of the horizontail tail is changed by deflecting the elevator, not the camber of the elevator itself. And yes the local angle of attack changes when the elevator deflects, resulting in an aerodynamic moment.