BKPMN — KnowledgeElement subclassing approach fragile?

The approach to defining kinds of knowledge element using subclassing seems likely to be fragile in the longer term - each time a new subtype is needed, the standard has to be re-issued. I don't see any obvious logic or theoretical basis for the collections of types Applicability, Effect, LifecycleEvent, Measure, RiskFactor, and Recommendation.

It seems to me that Applicability, Effect, Impact, etc should just be kinds of documentation rather than structurally modelled items. And they probably should not be fixed either - different BPMN / CMMN plans will have different ways of documeting things.