W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > June 2008

AW: [PRD] ACTION-531 Update PRD examples complete

From: Adrian Paschke <adrian.paschke@biotec.tu-dresden.de>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 23:00:32 +0200
To: "'Christian de Sainte Marie'" <csma@ilog.fr>, <kifer@cs.sunysb.edu>
Cc: "'Paul Vincent'" <pvincent@tibco.com>, "'RIF WG'" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20080623210023.BC11570000D3@mailserver.biotec.tu-dresden.de>

Typical examples are business rules, such as

If customer is premium customer then discount 10%
If customer is silver customer then discount 5%

It would make sense to present them independent from a particular dialect
such as PRD or BLD as they can be formalized in both dialects. 


-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org] Im
Auftrag von Christian de Sainte Marie
Gesendet: Montag, 23. Juni 2008 21:49
An: kifer@cs.sunysb.edu
Cc: Paul Vincent; RIF WG
Betreff: Re: [PRD] ACTION-531 Update PRD examples complete

Michael Kifer wrote:
> Your own words. You have been suggesting various changes to quantification
> such arguing that this is more compatible with your ideas about production
> rules.  For instance,
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rif-wg/2007Jun/0026.html,
> but also on a number of occasions during f2fs.

Indeed, I have always been, and still am, a strong supporter of BLD and 
PRD sharing the same meta-model and concrete XML syntax everywhere it 
made sense. That does not imply that they must share their concrete 
presentation syntax as well, does it?

> it has smthg to do with the credibility of the "target audience" claim.

...or with Gary not considering the "target audience" argument useful.

Received on Monday, 23 June 2008 21:01:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:51 UTC