[sc34wg3] abstract-constraint isa topic-type?

[Robert Cerny]

On Jan 29, 2010, at 12:44 PM, Lars Marius Garshol wrote:

> Yes. It's always that case that if
>
>   a isa b
>   c ako a
>
> then
>
>   c isa b
>
> This is stated here:
>   http://www.isotopicmaps.org/sam/sam-model/#sect-subtypes

I would translated the first sentence of that section into:

   c ako a
   b isa c

then

   b isa a

But this is something else than the above.

I think the following statement has to be made explicit in the meta  
schema:
tmcl:abstract-constraint isa tmcl:topic-type.

It also makes sense if you read:
http://www.isotopicmaps.org/tmcl/2009-10-19/#d0e504

> Could the problem be that "abstract-constraint" sounds like it  
> should be the parent type of "constraint"? It really is "topic-must- 
> be-abstract-constraint".

No, i just chose abstract-constraint because it is the first one  
listed. But now that i thought that i am totally confused :-)

Best,

Robert