Difference between a meta-and stereotyped relationship in profiles

[Paolo F Cantoni]

I'm struggling to understand the difference between a  Meta-Relationship connector between two Stereotypes (used to specify a valid UML Connector between these two Stereotypes) and a  Stereotyped Relationship connector between two Stereotypes (used to specify a valid stereotyped connector between these two Stereotypes).

Does the meta-relationship trump (in the contract bridge or whist sense) the stereotype relationship (if I don't specify the meta-relationship, I can't specify a stereotyped relationship whose base type is the meta-relationship type)?

If my MDG has NO relationships defined without a stereotype, do I need a meta-relationship arc at all?

TIA,
Paolo

[Eve]

Use a metarelationship only if you want to define rules for unstereotyped connectors between your stereotyped elements. A common example of this is my stereotype should only have a generalizations to elements with that stereotype.

I think specifying a stereotyped relationship will override any meta relationships that have been defined, including ones defined by us in the uml metamodel.

[Paolo F Cantoni]

Thanks, Eve,

Paolo