[rudycelekli]

A mention and an existing entity can share a name while their classes are not declared disjoint, not in one branch of the hierarchy, and not in the short confusable list. Resolution kept both entities and queued no review pair. It still keeps them apart, and now queues a type_drift review.

No shipped ontology pack declares disjointness, so a same-name match across two classes now queues a review pair, capped at 4 pairs per mention.

Relates to #1338.

[WaylandYang]

Thanks for the fixes. Reviews of #1429–#1445 are on hold until the open change requests are answered: #1398, #1399, #1403, #1405, #1407, #1411, #1412, #1413, #1414, #1415, #1418, #1421, #1422, #1423. Once those are done, please group fixes that touch the same function into one PR before asking for review. (#1444 overlaps Floating-Y's #1449, which covers the same restore case; it will likely be closed in favour of that one.)