The quality I take from it, is that the cmd/option/shift behaviours as modifiers, are policed well, and its like emacs: there's an overall consistency to what they want you to do, burned into muscle memory.
You cannot realistically make every single cmd+<letter> mnemonic. They do the best they can inside the circumstances, and then having chosen a base key, they say "ok. what do we bind to the alternates via option/shift" so it makes contextual sense.
I regard that as seeking intuitive behaviour. You are invited to (subconsciously) consider CMD+key as the base to learn, and then CMD+OPTION or CMD+SHIFT variants as the obvious alternates.
The key here, is ownership of the UI/UX: they police this. Much though Microsoft tries, it doesn't police this well enough across the independent app vendors outside of a tiny core of functions. Between Gnome and KDE, there is no policing.
I said emacs, because the basics of modifying lines of text in most things now, are emacs line modifiers by inheritance: because the X10-> X11 -> XOrg uplift means that the web omnibar and text boxes are inherently derived from X, the keystrokes to edit text are inherited from MIT X which inherited from MIT emacs.
As a VI user I just had to come to terms with this: Sure, you CAN force override them to VI friendly form, nobody does:
we're all emacs keystroke users in this narrow sense. Emacs won.
