Dear all, > Great, I have edited the two diagrams / (meta-)models to > initialize the Overview (Arch) Section: > > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/wiki/Core/Overview > > Looking to the RIF Core metamodel (the MOF/UML diagrams) a number of questions arise: * The existent BNF and the actual MOF/UML metamodel are NOT equivalent. For example the definition of equality (Equal): in the MOF model equality orders the terms implied (by using roles /lhs /and /rhs/) but in the BNF (Equal ::= TERM '=' TERM) no order is imposed. Lets try from the beginning to be more precise in such cases. I believe that BNF must align with the MOF abstract syntax. * Why we need the roles /formula/ and /declare/? How are they specified in the BNF? * Interesting, the last document of Core Positive Conditions contains now in the BNF two productions for /Atom /and /Expr /even they are the same in content. This separate de facto atoms from functions. * I suppose in the past was a problem of multiple inheritance (/Expr /was inheriting from both /Atom /and /TERM/) which creates troubles for tools to generate XMI, but in the MOF specification this is NOT restricted. * The naming of classes/roles are not appropriate. Why /arg /and not /arguments/? Thanks, AdrianReceived on Tuesday, 13 February 2007 09:06:41 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 2 June 2009 18:33:37 GMT