- From: Paul Vincent <pvincent@tibco.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2008 09:08:07 -0700
- To: "Rule Interchange Format Working Group WG" <public-rif-wg@w3.org>
As RIF is more likely to be deployment-time than PRR's model-time, it should (as a strategy) support a superset of PRR notions. Note that in PRR , "invoke" is used to model any external or engine call, including those that might have side effects on working memory: in other words it's a catch-all. Paul Vincent TIBCO | Business Optimization | Business Rules & CEP > -----Original Message----- > From: public-rif-wg-request@w3.org [mailto:public-rif-wg-request@w3.org] > On Behalf Of Rule Interchange Format Working Group Issue Tracker > Sent: 20 June 2008 16:13 > To: public-rif-wg@w3.org > Subject: ISSUE-62 (actions in PRD): Which actions should PRD cover [PRD ] > > > > ISSUE-62 (actions in PRD): Which actions should PRD cover [PRD ] > > http://www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/track/issues/ > > Raised by: Christian de Sainte Marie > On product: PRD > > - The basic actions in a production rule systems are ASSERT, RETRACT, > MODIFY; > - Most implemented PR languages have also the possibility to execute some > sort of externally specified code; > - In the non-normative PRR-OCL section, OMG PRR specifies five actions: > assert, retract, update, assign and invoke. > > What are action constructs should we specify in PRD? > >
Received on Friday, 20 June 2008 16:08:48 UTC