You could have a look at my care plan design: Obsolete status for care plan composition archetype - #25 by joostholslag
Or our covid vac archetypes: Sign In with Auth0
(Register for free account first; Please don’t look at the rest of the design, it’s driven by our limitations e.g. no action support. )
In general my advice would be to specialise on the minor version level, because that way patch updates (typos, etc) will be updated automatically, but breaking changes are not.
One reason to specialise patch level is if you have a hardcover ui, where an extra character my break the layout of a text label.
Another would be if you don’t want new elements to show up in the ui automatically.
Major updates include breaking changes, those should generally be reviewed before updating imho. An exception could be a measurement scale or something that is in itself a concept with versioning (new version of scale means new archetype not new version of an archetype).
These recommendations are coming from a scenario where most archetypes are scales where forms are auto generated from ADL2 templates. And the template is often autogenerated from an adl2 observation (wrapped in comp.result-report and adds eval.clinical_assesment).
Happy to share more, or explain in detail, since the models are quite complex, and adl2 is so different it may be a challenge to understand from this message alone.