W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rif-wg@w3.org > November 2009

Re: [PRD] Refraction Semantics may be WRONG!

From: Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2009 12:29:54 -0800
Message-ID: <4B0307C2.4070106@oracle.com>
To: Paul Vincent <pvincent@tibco.com>
CC: RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>, neal Wyse <neal.wyse@oracle.com>
Thanks, Paul. But this looks more like the modify_loop test. Can you 
specify a condition

exists(x.count > 0);

or perhaps,

not(not(x.count>0));

Do these rules also loop?

Paul Vincent wrote:
>
> TIBCO BusinessEvents rule engine also loops in this case - the action 
> is updating a property in the rule condition so the rule is placed 
> back on the agenda. In some other rule engines, the condition state 
> change (versus referenced rule variable state change) is what 
> determines whether a rule is placed back on the agenda.
>
> [Assuming I interpreted/mapped the PRD rule specification correctly... 
> Iím not sure whether ?C is just an intermediate term required by RIFís 
> expression language, or whether this is part of the test (have a rule 
> variable or term that is not a rule variable). Either way, I canít see 
> how adding another rule or simple variable will halt the rule looping 
> without some external influencer. ]
>
> Cheers
>
> Paul Vincent
>
> TIBCO
>
> > -----Original Message-----
>
> > From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org]
>
> > On Behalf Of Gary Hallmark
>
> > Sent: 17 November 2009 00:36
>
> > To: RIF WG
>
> > Cc: neal Wyse
>
> > Subject: [PRD] Refraction Semantics may be WRONG!
>
> >
>
> > I've discovered that refraction in OBR and Jess do not conform to the
>
> > PRD spec. In particular, the
>
> > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wiki/Modify_noloop test case will always
>
> > loop. The issue is that the PRD spec includes only the Forall variables
>
> > in the rule instance, but my system(s) also includes the Exists
>
> > variables in the rule instance.
>
> >
>
> > What do the other PR systems do? Can you please try the Modify_noloop
>
> > test?
>
> >
>
Received on Tuesday, 17 November 2009 20:33:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 17 November 2009 20:33:33 GMT