Re: Understanding Agrregates

Care to clarify a few details? 

 You say to use association otherwise; and I would assume that association must be an aggregate, otherwise an instance will be shared among two other aggregates (assuming those two are aggregates). Does association implies weak boundaries - aggregates?
 

 By "use composition", what do you actually mean - I'm slightly reading your advice as to use an value object instead of entity, but not sure if that's what you're getting at. 
 Also, not sure if I'm understanding your second point - entity is always identified by it's own, even when it's part of another aggregate, but from your advice I read that collection of entities should not be a part of another aggregate.
 

 Last thing: on your post you suggest "From an architectural perspective, one must set apart structural integrity constraints  from functional ones" which I guess is the standard way of doing things, but I find domain very valuable when it tries to merge structural an functional aspects - since then there is no mismatch between the models. I'm I reading the meaning of the message correctly?
 

 ps. much props to your website. I'll have to find some time to go through it - it's heavy on the terminology and thus hard to follow.
 

 Regards,
 Rikard