Re: RIF: A thought about requirements

Michael Kifer wrote:
> "Vincent, Paul D" <PaulVincent@fairisaac.com> wrote:
>   
>> It was my understanding that RIF phase 1 was more of an "academic"
>> exercise (without PRR), but subsequent phases would address PRR. 
>>     
>
> Exactly!
>
> Datalog is no more than a toy. This is why I kept emphasising planning for
> Ph 2, which is supposed to integrate PR, CWA, and active rules.
>
>
> 	--michael  
>
>
>   
+1. Datalog for phase 1 is not really interesting. PRR and ECA rules are
undoubtedly needed. Why not consider them already for phase 1?

Francois

Received on Monday, 29 May 2006 10:43:05 UTC