UML24 — Unclear constraint on stereotype associations

18.3.3 Semantics contains the following:

“Stereotypes can participate in associations. The opposite class can be another stereotype, a non-stereotype class that is

owned by a profile, or a metaclass of the reference metamodel. For these associations there must be a property owned by

the Stereotype to navigate to the opposite class. The opposite property must be owned by the Association itself rather than

the other class/metaclass.”

However this is not represented in a formal Constraint and the last sentence in particular is not relevant to associations between 2 stereotypes.

The offending paragraph is actually in 18.3.6, not 18.3.3 as stated in the issue.
There are two aspects to the resolution: rewording of the paragraph, and adding a formal constraint.
The paragraph is clearly (through the repeated use of the word “opposite”) intended to convey that stereotypes can participate in binary associations. This is consistent with the corresponding limitation in MOF. The rewording recognizes this.