Conformance Requirement 3.1 states that "4. Proportion Measures SHALL conform to the CQFMProportionMeasure profile or satisfy the proportion scoring constraints in the CQFMComputableMeasure profile.". 

The CQFMComputableMeasure profile has extensions such as populationBasis, scoringUnit, scoringPrecision (and a lot more) that are not available in the CQFMProportionMeasure profile.  Same is true for other scoring type specific measure profile: CQFMRatioMeasure, etc.. The examples that are linked to CQFMProportionMeasure (e.g.,  BCSComponent), it uses the extensions from Computable, and declared it conforms to both Proportion and ComputableMeasure profiles. 

It seems like that those CQFMProportionMeasure, CQFMRatioMeasure ... may need to derive from the CQFMComputableMeasure. So it is not really a "either ... or" scenario as specified in the Conformance Requirement. 

It is also not clear from the IG when a measure is specified whether it should use CQFMComputableMeasure, CQMFPublishableMeasure, and/or CQFMExecutableMeasure, or what combinations of them. The examples included in the IG use these inconsistently and do not provide clear description of the intended use case in terms of using these profiles. For example, when a measure is released by a quality program for public reporting, should the measure resource be required to conform to all three (Computable, Publishable, Executable)?