-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 26
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Remove as many RelationConcept
s from the instance models as possible, by using ModelKind
more
#2371
Comments
Note to self: Once all OthModels are converted into other things, we can easily implement MayHaveUnit of GenDefns in terms of the ModelKinds instead of having a separate field for it. |
I don't remember where you (@JacquesCarette) mentioned it, but you previously mentioned that ModelKinds may need to be converted into a triple with a custom UID, NP (term), and the original ModelKind, and I think that with the last bunch of models, we will need that. Most of the existing converted ones only needed either a custom UID or term, so we added them to the models (IM/GD/TM) instead of the MK, but some of the last ones appear to need both. I can see us changing
or:
The second variant is probably better. |
Yes. As I've mentioned elsewhere, 4-tuples (and above): never. 3-tuples? rarely, and need strong justification. |
See f23bf7b for example. This is part of adding
ModelKind
toInstanceModel
.Basically, every instance model in all examples should be looked at, and either
OthModel
to something else (one per PR!)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: