I must admit, I am not happy about the changes the new KNX2 binding introduced, either. Please understand, this is not a rant or meant negative in any way, it is just my concerned feedback as a user (not developer!).
I highly appreciate all the hard work you guys are contributing to this awesome project and for me, developing software is close to magic.
But looking at the overall development of OH2 and the stated intention to make it MORE user friendly, sometimes i am not sure this is going into the right direction. Maybe you want to stop for a second, review the development path and make sure, you do not forget the non-developers out there.
This new behaviour of the KNX2 binding might bring it in line with the OH2 logic and I understood from other posts of Udo that “this is the way OH2 is designed”. But please think about the increased complexity you just encountered by yourself - and I fully agree with the conclusion of juelicher here as well.
So my honest and concerned feedback would be: maybe you want to stop a moment and think about some details in regards to bindings like the KNX2 one to maybe find some compromises between “correct alignment to the overall concept” and “have it userfriendly and simple, not more complex”.
Again, please understand my post right, this is more of a “cry for help” and not a rant. I have seen people asking for a little bit more support for non-developers, but their feedback obviously was perceived as a personal attack by some people (developers), rather than a valuable feedback from potential users of the work that might help OH2 to become even better.
It is not always right to be right, so to say 
Sometimes less perfection can lead to a “better” product for the user.
Just my 2 cents…
[edit] Just found this post here KNX2, how to set it up?
One needs to configure KNX physical device addresses as well now, let alone using a strange syntax with dashes instead of points? Seriously?