I'll reiterate, its not a core standard. Its is a descriptive spec for knowledge bases on top of nostr, who is using that right now other that our group? No one, therefore we don't need to worry about new standards. 
effective navigation on a knowledge base is entirely dependent on the domain it is a part of. 

A biology knowledge base is not going to have the same labels and tags as a literature, coding or writing knowledge base, and that's perfectly fine. So long as they are internally consistent with their users, they can exist as their own island. Now if your biology KB users and someone else's physics KB users want to collaborate but there are incompatabilities, the users will tell the developers to figure something out. If the developers are stubborn and don't want to change, they'll move to another client that actually works. Its not a claim for universal compatability.

Also, never made the claim that my spec is correct or cannonical. if its shit i want to know and nostr's functionality provides the fastest way to get feedback from those more experienced without permission. If a NKB really is that important, go ahead and submit it to the core nips repository, that's just not my priority. I don't really care who finds the "correct spec" i just want it to exist.