Re: proposed: use abstract syntax notation (asn06)

Dave Reynolds wrote:

> 
> Well there is ASN.1 of course ...

Good point. Seriously - why reinvent a YAAST (Yet Another Abstract
Syntax Notation)?

> ASN.1 is pretty complex but I guess it might be possible to make asn06 a 
> strict subset of ASN.1 then one could use the various ASN.1 tools for 
> generating concrete serializations using the standardized or custom 
> encoding rules.

I think this is not as far-fetched as it sounds - with the caveat that
ASN.1 lacks detailed descriptors for URI's. Still, we could express
quite a chunk of what we need for RIF using a very small subset of ASN.1
(http://www.itu.int/ITU-T/studygroups/com17/languages/X.680-0207.pdf).

> Though I detect a lack of fondness in people's voices when they talk 
> about ASN.1 ...

Yes - but is this any worse than when we hear people speak of XML Schemas
or any of the W3C Language Mill's output? ;-) This being said, Dan Conolly's
point about having to learn, and get familiar with, yet another notation is
a valid one. But do we have any choice? One way or another we will have to
bite the bullet and write down a sufficiently complete specification for
rule interoperability - are we not? Any formal notation that is sufficient
"up-to-isomorphism" will do. So why ahould be care so much more about HOW
we describe - (E)BNF, AST, ASN.1, ... or whatever - than about WHAT we
need to describe?

Thus, I share Michael Kifer's frustration with this WG's relentless lack
of focus on essential issues due it being constantly side-tracked on form
rather than contents. Indeed, like the [in]famous mythical "Buridan's Ass"
who died of hunger and thirst between a water bucket and a heap of hay just
because he could not make up his mind on whether to eat of drink first, so
are we talking past each other and running in circles ... :-(
http://www.mon-expression.info/index.php/etre-comme-l-ane-de-buridan.

	Genesis 11:6 (KLV)
         "And the LORD said, Behold, the people is one, and they have all
         one language; and this they begin to do: and now nothing will be
         restrained from them, which they have imagined to do."

	Genesis 11:7 (KLV)
         "Go to, let us go down, and there confound their language, that they
         may not understand one another's speech."

> Dave

-hak

PS/ Yes - this is a rethorical point - shall we move on? :-)
-- 
Hassan Aït-Kaci
ILOG, Inc. - Product Division R&D
tel/fax: +1 (604) 930-5603 - email: hak @ ilog . com

Received on Tuesday, 14 November 2006 00:49:46 UTC