And also, again afaics, there's a horde of people, probably mostly students, who believe they are building their own zettelkasten when they are doing nothing that Luhmann would recognise as related to his own system. Partly because technology has led them astray, partly because they misunderstand the system itself (I suspect Ahrens has a lot to answer for here), partly because their needs are quite different to those Luhmann was addressing, and substantially because the system cannot stretch beyond its original purpose to adapt to different circumstances without entropy overwhelming its functionality.
We've already covered the need to retain value from the reading that does not currently deserve extra spent writing a note.
Many people have to cope with making notes and reading texts on subjects they do not choose for themselves.
They may have no reasonable expectation of their notes being part of a publication of any sort. (And afaics many are simply motivated by the need to remember what they are told they need to know.)
All these may still benefit from linking and are all capable of being developed in the future. But they may not need perfect writing or a strong reworking focus.
So, to me, that makes a boundary around the zettelkasten separating it from such concerns. Possibly a completely different system to manage them (Luhmann's own approach) or possibly a very similar system differentiated only by concept and daily practice. Assuming someone actually wants a zettelkasten.
Further, there is no gain from trying to apply zettly methods to all notes and documents.