Is it allowed to define abstract types in archetypes, I once saw an archetype which held an EVENT as attribute, so the constructor of the rm-object which had to be validated against the archetype, could at runtime decide if he wanted to use a POINT_EVENT or INTERVAL_EVENT.
Is this allowed?
Same can occur with data_structures and data_values.
Suppose (theoretically) an archetype which has LOCATABLE as definition-class.
It allows virtually everything as valid rm-object.
Is it allowed to define abstract types in archetypes, I once saw an archetype which held an EVENT as attribute, so the constructor of the rm-object which had to be validated against the archetype, could at runtime decide if he wanted to use a POINT_EVENT or INTERVAL_EVENT.
Is this allowed?
the runtime has to decide (if not already decided by the archetypes or templates) - there is no choice!
Same can occur with data_structures and data_values.
Suppose (theoretically) an archetype which has LOCATABLE as definition-class.
It allows virtually everything as valid rm-object.
it would but you can't state any interesting constraints with just LOCATABLE, so it is more likely to be something like EVENT.