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

RE: [RIF-APS] Rules Sign

From: Paul Vincent <pvincent@tibco.com>
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 05:51:59 -0700
Message-ID: <637B7E7B51291C48838F5AE1F2ACA1D7492ABE@NA-PA-VBE02.na.tibco.com>
To: <public-rif-wg@w3.org>


'<= ' should be used in backward-chaining dialects, and '=>' in
forward-chaining ones. 


Paul Vincent

TIBCO | Business Optimization | Business Rules & CEP



From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Patrick Albert
Sent: 04 September 2008 12:54
To: Adrian Paschke; public-rif-wg@w3.org
Subject: RE: [RIF-APS] Rules Sign


Most Production Rules system have rules in the form  IF/WHEN
<conditions> THEN <actions>.


I'd recommend we adhere to the existing practice which is to have the
conditions first followed by the actions. 

Replacing the IF .. THEN by a '=>' as in '<Conditions> => <Actions>'
would be ok.





From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org]
On Behalf Of Adrian Paschke
Sent: lundi 1 septembre 2008 22:09
To: public-rif-wg@w3.org
Subject: [RIF-APS] Rules Sign




With respect to the abridged presentation syntax there is still an open
issue about the sign to distinguish the head and the body of a rule.


Currently, we use ":-" in the examples e.g. in UCR and PRD, which is
well-known in the logic community but not so much in others including
production rules.


I shortly discussed this issue with the BLD/FLD editors Michael and
Harold and we came up with this unambiguous proposal to distinguish
classical implication and rules head and body.


<== for PRD and BLD

<-- for classical


<== and <-- might be also reverted ==> -->





Received on Thursday, 4 September 2008 12:52:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:47:52 UTC