The goal is to have minimum functional coverage.
If you are creating a token which in any jurisdiction could require some compliance then it’s better to have a look at AEX-11.
One idea could be to use two different transfer functions to avoid confusions and had a better wallet support. At this moment AEX-9 and AEX-11 collide on transfer function. So maybe I will change it’s name to spend.
@bruteforce.chain - what do you think? Either we make a transfer compatible otherwise I’m ok to change a function name in AEX-11.