- From: Christian de Sainte Marie <csma@ilog.fr>
- Date: Tue, 01 Jul 2008 15:17:12 +0200
- To: Mark Proctor <mproctor@redhat.com>
- CC: Gary Hallmark <gary.hallmark@oracle.com>, RIF WG <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
Mark Proctor wrote: > > If you supported Clips unororded facts (named arguments), except COOL, > and made "or" and "forall" optional you would be able to target all the > mainstream engines - Jess, Drools, Clips, JRules, OPSJ. It's really that > simple. "Forall" is just a construct to declare rule variables: how can you do without it? > All these engines implement TMS in the same way, but that could > be excluded from the base PR dialect, as it's an advanced feature only a > few users use. Yes, I agree: logical facts and truth maintenance are for a future version (of this draft, or maybe even of this dialect). > So I would look to make this subset of Clips my "base" PR > dialect. At a later date I would then look to make an advanced addition > on this that looked to support "or", "forall", "collect/accumulate" for > reason of sets of data, nested accessors, lists/maps, out of working > memory data. "collect" is an important one that is supported by Jess, > JRules and Drools (don't know about OPSJ) as it's the only efficient way > to do cardinality constraints on patterns, and users really struggle > without it. Jess supports collect via accumulate, accumulate is actually > far more powerful and generic and collect is a specialised accumulate > implementation. Yes. I proposed "collect" in the very first proto-draft, and a more general aggregation construct in the second one, but we decided to keep that for later, as they were only half-backed trials (to say the least :-) Christian
Received on Tuesday, 1 July 2008 13:18:30 UTC