Should types:Thread have been a subclass of core:UcoObject?

[ajnelson-nist]

Issue 430 is establishing a top-level class core:UcoThing to give a parent class to classes that are not currently explicit subclasses of anything. (Implicitly in OWL, this makes them subclasses of owl:Thing.)

Issue 469 asked about a few "Data structure"-style Dictionary classes that were not subclasses of core:UcoObject, for reasons that I admit I still can't explain.

Issue 393 added a new "Data structure"-style class, types:Thread, that I realize now serves some of the same data model role in UCO that the types:Dictionary class does. However, it was defined in the implementation for 393 to be a subclass of core:UcoObject.

Should types:Thread be a subclass instead of core:UcoThing like the Dictionary class?

This will impact the implementation for Issue 430.

[ajnelson-nist]

Absent stronger feelings from the committee, I will assume the answer is yes, the correct subclassing for types:Thread is core:UcoThing, not core:UcoObject, and adjust 430's implementation to account for this.

[ajnelson-nist]

Answer's yes.

[ajnelson-nist]

Resolved in 57bc4bc, part of resolving Issue 430.