[rules-users] How to define keywords that represent objects(in facts) to be able to use in rules

[Wolfgang Laun]

OK, so you use this as a DSL definition. Where is the problem?
-W

On 9 August 2012 16:22, san_drools <pathasantosh at yahoo.co.in> wrote:

> Hello Laune,
>                  Yes, the Object and attribute names are meaningful but in
> our case they are a bit lengthy and wanted to give rule author more
> convinience in writing rules.
>
>                 For example, when we need to write Object1($contactNo :
> contactNumber && contacttype == "mobile") to get contact number and use it
> further in rule, we will give a keyword "PersonMobileContact" to represent
> the above line. So that, rule author simply uses this keyword. This is i
> want in my requirement.
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://drools.46999.n3.nabble.com/How-to-define-keywords-that-represent-objects-in-facts-to-be-able-to-use-in-rules-tp4019065p4019068.html
> Sent from the Drools: User forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> rules-users mailing list
> rules-users at lists.jboss.org
> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-users
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/rules-users/attachments/20120809/22d8d6b1/attachment.html