A discussion about the nature of Application Component and System Software elements

Should Application Component (renamed as Logical Software Component) also model Logical Technology Components?

"Logical Application Component" is defined in TOGAF 10 as "An encapsulation of application functionality that is definable by services offered and data maintained, independently of implementation and technology.", which is in line with the current definition of Application Component. "Logical Technology Component" is defined in TOGAF as “An implementation-independent encapsulation of technology services.” If we focus on the “implementation independency” of both definitions, they might very well be merged in the ArchiMate language for the sake of simplicity (and specialized as needed).

That would avoid the usage of (specialized) Application Component to model implementation-agnostic System Software like databases, ESBs, application-execution platforms, and the such.

On the same reasoning, should System Software (renamed as Physical Software Component) also model the implemented counterpart of a Logical Application Component (being it a custom application or a basic software)?

"Physical Application Component" is defined in TOGAF 10 as "A realization of logical application functionality using components of functionality in applications that may be hired, procured, or built."

That would avoid the usage of (specialized) System Software to model implementation-specific application components when an active element is needed (implemented application access implemented database).

These are examples of what I need to model (and how I model it):