Disable confusion

[Borg]

Here's how I think it works :

I cast a [mwcard=MWSTX2FFI03] Disarm[/mwcard] targeting the enemy mage and then choose his Dragonscale Hauberk to place a Disable marker on it.
I figure at that point the enemy mage loses the Armor+2 and Flame -2 from the Hauberk but now I'm not so sure anymore because let's look at the text on the [mwcard=MW1Q06] Dragonscale Hauberk[/mwcard]
 "Mage gains Armor+2 and the Flame-2 TRAIT

while the codex on Disable says :
"Disable is a condition that temporarily prevents an object from functioning. If an object has one or more Disable markers on it, it is Disabled. Disabled objects lose all attack bars, action bars, and non-trait abilities."

So, it looks as if the Armor+2 is canceled during a disable but since the Flame-2 is a Trait and Traits are apparently NOT disabled it looks as if the Flame -2 is still in effect.

Is that correct ?
And second question, is that really intended to work like that ? because this way Disarm seems great to temporarily disable a weapon ( or anything with an attack bar or action bar ) but not so efficient against armor or Cloaks.

Versus an Elemental Cloak for instance you would only be able to eliminate the Armor+1 but the Flame-2, Frost-2 and Lightning-2 would all remain in effect while it is "disabled" ?

[ACG]

I cast a [mwcard=MWSTX2FFI03] Disarm[/mwcard] targeting the enemy mage and then choose his Dragonscale Hauberk to place a Disable marker on it.
I figure at that point the enemy mage loses the Armor+2 and Flame -2 from the Hauberk

This is the correct interpretation.

The line about non-trait abilities means abilities that are not traits actually printed on the disabled card. For instance, Disable will not get rid of [mwcard=FWQ01]Dancing Scimitar[/mwcard]'s Upkeep +1 trait.

In the case of [mwcard=MW1Q06]Dragonscale Hauberk[/mwcard], the Hauberk does not have the Armor +2 or Flame -2 traits; its ability text says that the equipped mage gains those traits. Disable only leaves traits that are possessed by the disabled object itself.

[Borg]

Thank you so much, ACG, I see the distinction.
*sigh of relief*
that "non-trait abilities" part had me there for a minute.