Status of the "redefining and including other SHEX definitions" discussion?

Hi all,

a wishlist for additional ShEx features is available at
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Discussion_SHEX_format

One feature sounds especially interesting: "Redefining and including other
SHEX definitions"
(cf
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/wiki/Discussion_SHEX_format#Discussion_2.2C_redefining_and_including_other_SHEX_definitions)

Quote:

"With the current implementation a redefinition means that both rules must
be satisfied, which is good.

However, in some cases you would like to either

   1. indicate is that is either should apply to the first or the new rule
   (what we want in this example)
   2. redefine the rule completely
   3. remove the rule"


Another quote:
"To be able to update/redefine subgroup they should be named."


Is there a common agreement on the list that this is VERY useful for
modularization, lifecycle and reuse of schemas?
This point has been very poorly addressed by the XmlSchema community, and I
really would like to point
out the importance of that feature.
(I have absolutely no clue about the difficulty to implement it, btw :)