Profiles make ADL and OPT provisioning mandatory. There are implementations that work only with ADLs or OPTs.
I would suggest to require just one of the ADL or OPT provisioning not both at the same time, since that will leave out some providers from comply with the CORE and BASIC profiles.
If I recall correctly Code24 uses only archetypes, and EHRServer uses only OPTs.
I agree that this might need a little tweaking. I am happy that base compliance should allow for either ADL or OPT provisioning, though I think it is Medrecord that uses ADL not Code24. This sets a relatively low barrier for conformance.
However for 'Platform' (which I think is lost from the docs right now) IMO, we need a much tighter set of criteria, including OPT, AQL support. These are now pretty well-established as the approach of the leading implementations, or on early roadmap to support. We cannot have true no-CDR lockin from an app developers perspective without those in place, alongside the canonical API. I do not regard these as base criteria as openEHR compliance at a data level is a perfectly legitimate goal also.