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

RE: [TED] An alternative proposal for the technical design

From: Paul Vincent <pvincent@tibco.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Oct 2006 15:17:39 -0700
Message-ID: <8F4A4531BB49A74387A7C99C7D0B0E050159A1BC@NA-PA-VBE02.na.tibco.com>
To: "Christian de Sainte Marie" <csma@ilog.fr>, "RIF WG" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>

Christian: 

1. Your TED is presumably an alternative to http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Extensible_Design 
[I am noting that there are new members of this group, so emails should really include their context to assist them].

2. Would a summary of your proposal be?
- RIF does not need to have the rigor of a rule language itself
- RIF is an interchange format 

If so: +1 in that this approach is likely to be simpler + quicker; however I would be interested in a comparison table (Harold?).

Cheers

Paul Vincent
TIBCO - ETG/Business Rules 
 

-----Original Message-----
From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Christian de Sainte Marie
Sent: 27 October 2006 15:00
To: RIF WG
Subject: [TED] An alternative proposal for the technical design


All,

([TED] stands for TEchnical Design)

I have hinted and ranted and hoped that somebody would come forward with 
a counter-proposal to Harold's et al, and, indeed, some came. But none 
of the kind that I hoped for. So, I took "mon courage a deux mains" and 
my limited competence in the other, and I tried it myself...

You will find the result on the Wiki: 
http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Alternative_Extensible_Design

Do not hesitate to ask if something is not clear (or, should I say: do 
not hesitate to ask? :-)

Christian
Received on Friday, 27 October 2006 22:18:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:34 GMT