Re: terminology confusion: subclass, superclass

[Danny Bobrow <Bobrow.pa@Xerox.COM>]

Moon says:

"My conclusion from all this is that we need consistent names for the
six
concepts mentioned above, and I'm willing to drop the component /
dependent
terminology in favor of completely consistent use of:
        xxx subclass            n>=0
        proper subclass         n>=1
        direct subclass         n=1
        direct superclass       n=1
        proper superclass       n>=1
        xxx superclass          n>=0
I'm looking for suggestions for the word xxx.  If we really can't think
of
anything, that word could be omitted."

I agree.  I sugest we use the phrases "effective subclass" and
"effective superclass" where we want to emphasize the possibility of
n=0, and allow "subclass" and "superclass" to mean that as well. 


  danny