SMOF_ — SMOF cumbersome for semantic applications

SMOF says it gives support to "semantic structures", in particular citing "structural rigidity of object-oriented programming systems" (Section 1, 7.1), including "type / classification systems" as a problem area, but in contrast to typical "semantic" languages, SMOF assumes types are disjoint unless otherwise stated (see Section 9.1.2.1, Incompatibility, Semantics, first paragraph, last sentence), and even prevents reclassification between general and special types by default (see use case in four earlier issues starting with AspectOf, and the immediately previous issue). Typical "semantic" applications will be forced to define compatibility over most types in their models. Perhaps this burden could be reduced by compatiblity between types as the default, or maybe a batch compatibility declaration at the level of packages.

Resolved by resolution to issue 17150: Metaclasses are considered compatible by default.
Revised Text:
None. Resolution provided by resolution to issue 17150.
Disposition: Closed – Duplicate / Merged – see issue 17163