SYSML21 — Redefining special semantic features shall force adjustment of implied subsettings

There are several places in the specification of SysMLv2.0, that prescribe nested features subsetting from specialized library features.
As an example, spec prescribes that parts inside other parts or part definitions be specialized (directly or indirectly) from Items::subparts feature. Analogous prescriptions exist for actions in actions etc.
Now, if the parent of the part (usage or def) is specialized from some other concept, which has a redefinition of such a specialized library feature, it follows (from normal redefinition and subsetting semantics) that these implied specializations should be adjusted to point to the redefined feature.
This is not explicitly formulated in the spec (even though it is implied) and the pilot implementation (which has aspirations to be turned into reference implementation) does not behave as described above.
Thus:
1) spec should beget clarification of this case explaining expected behavior.
2) reference implementation should behave as described.
3) A test case in the conformance WG should check this.
Example:
/**** Some domain library - e.g. UAF *****/
part def SpecialType;

part def SpecializedDomainConcept

/**** User model ******/

part def UsersConceptFromSpecDomain : SpecializedDomainConcept

/*
The current behavior of reference implementation is that userSubpart1, userSubpart2 are subsetting (implied) Item::subparts.
The expectation is that userSubpart1, userSubpart2 shall be subsetting (implied) SpecializedDomainConcept::specializedSubparts and thus beget the type SpecialType
*/