UAF11 — Constraints for ResourceInteractionKind.ResourceEnergyFlow don’t make sense

The constraints for ResourceInteractionKind.ResourceEnergyFlow doesn’t make sense, as NaturalResource could be (according to the specification) any resource that occurs in nature such as oil, water, gas or coal. Saying that a ResourceExchange that conveys water is not saying it conveys energy… Plus, I’d argue that energy (in terms of an architecture) isn’t something that occurs in nature – it’s “power derived from the utilization of physical or chemical resources, especially to provide light and heat or to work machines”. This takes me back to saying that it seems like Energy should have been left in UAF again…

Energy falls under NaturalResources and we do not see a need to have it as separate element

Energy falls under NaturalResources and we do not see a need to have it as separate element in UAF profile and DMM. Energy can be added as a domain specific extension if there is a need.