UML241 — Property::isID

Is there a semantic difference between markign an associationEnd with isID=true and putting an upper bound of "1" on its opposite end (i.e., a value of this end is related to a maximum of 1 value on the other end)?

If there is no semantic difference, is Property::isID only useful for attributes that are not association ends (like primitive attributes that are typically not ends)?

Assume a classifier A has a property that is an association end typed by B, and assume its opposite end has the
multiplicity 1..1.
Even if this implies that, at any time, only one instance of A can be associated with a given instance of B, nothing
stops this association from changing over time. Thus, a given instance of B cannot be used “a priori” for identifying
an instance of A. So there is no redundancy with the semantics of Property::isID as suggested by the issue.
Disposition: Closed - No Change