What does reabstraction mean?

[Per Rovegård]

> The motivation is simple: a subclass can impose semantics which it has
> reason to believe the superclass implementation cannot provide, so it
> wants to veto the existing implementation and force a new one to be
> provided.

There's also the question of who the decision maker is. It's perfectly
fine that an interface author makes a decision that relates to the
superinterfaces of the interface, but it doesn't make sense that such
a decision should extend to the implementation of said interface. If
the implementor of an interface decides that some _other_ superclass
or superinterface can provide the adequate semantics, then he should
have the power to make that decision. This is an argument against the
strong model/case.

Per