Closed renghardt closed 1 year ago
I think the "at layer N" part is related to how our path can be defined at different layers of abstraction. So the layer at which you'd consider disjointness is the layer at which you consider the path elements and define the path. And then, there could still be a more granular definition at a different level of abstraction.
Not entirely sure what to add here, but maybe referencing the level of abstraction will help? @cyrill-k I think you originally proposed this definition, do you have any opinions?
From the IRSG review by Dave Oran: