W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > December 2006

Re: [TED] Action-188, ISSUE: production rule systems have "difficulty" with recursive rules in RIF Core

From: Michael Kifer <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 09:03:05 -0500
To: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Cc: Francis McCabe <frankmccabe@sandsoft.com>, W3C RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <12534.1166450585@cs.sunysb.edu> 


> > Yes, but the purpose of the RIF is to support the interchange of any  
> > rule language. Conformance must be expressed in terms of being  
> > faithful to the semantics of RIF, not whether you implement  
> > everything in it. If you are faithful to the semantics, then someone  
> > else can come along and reliably interpret your translated rule set.
> 
> How do you suggest that I -- a user -- know what rules I can write and
> remain confident they will work on several other vendors' systems?
> 
>      -- Sandro


My suggestion would be to give up this unrealistic goal.
Any rule set that meets this criterion (remember that you said that you
don't want to change any of the rule systems) is not worth writing.


	--michael
Received on Monday, 18 December 2006 14:03:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 15 February 2008 17:40:23 GMT