UMLR — Shouldn't Gate and InteractionFragment be redefinable to support Interaction specialization?

ML 2.5 section 17.2.3 Interaction semantics says:

As Behavior an Interaction is generalizable and redefineable. Specializing an Interaction is simply to add more traces to those of the original. The traces defined by the specialization is combined with those of the inherited Interaction with a union.

If a parent Interaction defines Gates, then a specializing Interaction will inherit its parent's Gates as Classifier::/inheritedMember.
However, Gates that are inherited from a parent Interaction are not formalGates of a specializing Interaction; therefore, they cannot be used or redefined in the context of the specializing Interaction!

Similarly, if a parent Interaction has fragments, then a specializing Interaction will inherit its parent's InteractionFragment as Classifier::/inheritedMember.
However, InteractionFragment that are inherited from a parent Interaction are not fragments of a specializing Interaction; therefore, they cannot be used or redefined in the context of the specializing Interaction!

To support the intent of the Interaction semantics, I suggest adding RedefinableElement as generalization parents of Gate and InteractionFragment.