- From: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
- Date: Tue, 24 Jun 2008 19:06:01 +0200
- To: Adrian Paschke <adrian.paschke@biotec.tu-dresden.de>
- CC: "'Gary Hallmark'" <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>, "'pu >> RIF WG'" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Adrian Paschke wrote: > Actually, > > ?f1 <- (valve ?v open) > > in Clips means: Match a valve fact whose first parameter is variable ?v and > second parameter is constant 'open'. When you find a match, then ?f1 is the > ID of this fact which can be used in the head of a rule to assert it, i.e. > > ... -> assert(?f1) I still do not get it: if ?f1 is a fact, you cannot bind it to a variable without reifying it. If it is not, what is it? Or is it the identifier of an object that has several valve properties with value "open" (or "closed", I guess)? I mean, rewritten with frames, is it something like this: ?v#valve AND ?v[status->open] or is it rather something like that: ?f1[?v->open], where ?v binds to the name of one of ?f1 valve properties? (thinking aloud: no, it cannot be what you mean, because, then, you would assert ?f1[?v->open], not ?f1) So, no, I still do not get it :-( Why do not you assert valve(?v open)? Actually, I do not even understand why you need to assert it: if it matches, does not that mean that it has been asserted already? (As you see, I do not know CLIPS :-) > But, I agree as our goal is to have an uncontroversial minimal PRD which > works for all production rule systems and is aligned with BLD, we should not > include it in the first working draft. I do not agree that this is our goal, as you know.
Received on Tuesday, 24 June 2008 17:07:08 UTC