Hello folks, Sorry for barging in by subscribing to this developers alias We are a Intellectual capital Management team in Cisco Systems. We have been using our own engines to do specific jobs for past 10 years, as part of future growth we have decided to do away with our own custom engines and use the drools engine to do Inference & event management rules. Good choice .. :) We have evaluated the capabilities of rule authoring UIs in drools and have faced some resistance from our Subject Matter Experts to build our own UIs .. basically some templates which they can fill out instead of understanding the complexities of Guvnor. Also we felt that some layer of abstraction could be provided above guvnor UI since it does not yet provide support for IC (Fusion based) Approach: We are trying to put in some extensions to BRL to support the fusion usecases and any other which we need. The reason we are doing it to BRL is the same as yours .. that UI editors work with XML kind of structure instead of a DRL file. So eventually we would also enhance the BRL->DRL converters and provide support in BRL to ObjectContainment (Facts containing collection of facts) and provide testing capabilities for inference and event IC. Concern: If we make any enhancements to BRL then we would want to integrate back to community code so we can utilize any extensions to the BRL, DRL and converters which are done by community and do not paint ourselves in a corner. We can share our work to provide ideas back to community and may be we can provide some other enhancements for the community. Can you kindly guide us on how to make these enhancements and how do we contribute to the code. and any standards and guidelines pages. Regards, Amit _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev

In reality I'd like to see the BRL killed. We already have two poorly maintained xml formats, neither keep up to date with DRL. BRL was initially designed as a simple xml, as we believed tooling wouldn't want full DRL. As it turns out most people do actually just want a GUI builder that supports full DRL. As a result I'd like to see an investment in a new XML format that future proofs, for our designs for drools 6: http://community.jboss.org/wiki/DroolsLanguageEnhancements I've been reluctant to start my own XML here, as i'd like to see us work with the RuleML group in adopting their xml (probably with feedback on needed changes) as our defualt XML for Drools. Although for the immediate need for improving the guided editor we have no choice but to continue to extend BRL, but those doing so should probably have it in mind that it's a temporary solution. Mark On 11/08/2010 03:34, Amit Kumar wrote: Hello folks, Sorry for barging in by subscribing to this developers alias We are a Intellectual capital Management team in Cisco Systems. We have been using our own engines to do specific jobs for past 10 years, as part of future growth we have decided to do away with our own custom engines and use the drools engine to do Inference & event management rules. Good choice .. :) We have evaluated the capabilities of rule authoring UIs in drools and have faced some resistance from our Subject Matter Experts to build our own UIs .. basically some templates which they can fill out instead of understanding the complexities of Guvnor. Also we felt that some layer of abstraction could be provided above guvnor UI since it does not yet provide support for IC (Fusion based) Approach: We are trying to put in some extensions to BRL to support the fusion usecases and any other which we need. The reason we are doing it to BRL is the same as yours .. that UI editors work with XML kind of structure instead of a DRL file. So eventually we would also enhance the BRL->DRL converters and provide support in BRL to ObjectContainment (Facts containing collection of facts) and provide testing capabilities for inference and event IC. Concern: If we make any enhancements to BRL then we would want to integrate back to community code so we can utilize any extensions to the BRL, DRL and converters which are done by community and do not paint ourselves in a corner. We can share our work to provide ideas back to community and may be we can provide some other enhancements for the community. Can you kindly guide us on how to make these enhancements and how do we contribute to the code. and any standards and guidelines pages. Regards, Amit _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev@lists.jboss.orghttps://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev

Hi Amit, You might be interested in the RuleML 1.0 release which will be published at the RuleML conference (http://2010.ruleml.org) and Business Rules Forum in Washington DC. RuleML is not just one language but a complete language family with an overarching extensible design including derivation rule languages and Reaction RuleML for production rules, ECA rules and rule-based CEP. To learn more about the language design and family and how it relates to sub languages such as W3C SWRL and RIF you can download the free sample chapter (in the menu) from the Handbook on Emerging Rule Technologies http://www.igi-global.com/bookstore/TitleDetails.aspx?TitleId=465. Regards, Adrian ------------------------------ *Von:* rules-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org [mailto: rules-dev-bounces(a)lists.jboss.org] *Im Auftrag von *Amit Kumar *Gesendet:* Mittwoch, 11. August 2010 16:45 *An:* Rules Dev List *Betreff:* Re: [rules-dev] Enhancements to Rule XML (BRL) Hi Mark, Yeah , we also wanted to use RuleML but seeing its status we decided to use BRL and "hoped" that once RuleML is bit more evolved then Drools will provide us some export mechanism to RuleML or we can build it. You are in UK right? Let me setup a call with you outlining our approach and invite some more team members from our side.. Regards, Amit On Wed, Aug 11, 2010 at 6:54 AM, Mark Proctor <mproctor(a)codehaus.org&gt; wrote: In reality I'd like to see the BRL killed. We already have two poorly maintained xml formats, neither keep up to date with DRL. BRL was initially designed as a simple xml, as we believed tooling wouldn't want full DRL. As it turns out most people do actually just want a GUI builder that supports full DRL. As a result I'd like to see an investment in a new XML format that future proofs, for our designs for drools 6: http://community.jboss.org/wiki/DroolsLanguageEnhancements I've been reluctant to start my own XML here, as i'd like to see us work with the RuleML group in adopting their xml (probably with feedback on needed changes) as our defualt XML for Drools. Although for the immediate need for improving the guided editor we have no choice but to continue to extend BRL, but those doing so should probably have it in mind that it's a temporary solution. Mark On 11/08/2010 03:34, Amit Kumar wrote: Hello folks, Sorry for barging in by subscribing to this developers alias We are a Intellectual capital Management team in Cisco Systems. We have been using our own engines to do specific jobs for past 10 years, as part of future growth we have decided to do away with our own custom engines and use the drools engine to do Inference & event management rules. Good choice .. :) We have evaluated the capabilities of rule authoring UIs in drools and have faced some resistance from our Subject Matter Experts to build our own UIs .. basically some templates which they can fill out instead of understanding the complexities of Guvnor. Also we felt that some layer of abstraction could be provided above guvnor UI since it does not yet provide support for IC (Fusion based) Approach: We are trying to put in some extensions to BRL to support the fusion usecases and any other which we need. The reason we are doing it to BRL is the same as yours .. that UI editors work with XML kind of structure instead of a DRL file. So eventually we would also enhance the BRL->DRL converters and provide support in BRL to ObjectContainment (Facts containing collection of facts) and provide testing capabilities for inference and event IC. Concern: If we make any enhancements to BRL then we would want to integrate back to community code so we can utilize any extensions to the BRL, DRL and converters which are done by community and do not paint ourselves in a corner. We can share our work to provide ideas back to community and may be we can provide some other enhancements for the community. Can you kindly guide us on how to make these enhancements and how do we contribute to the code. and any standards and guidelines pages. Regards, Amit _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev _______________________________________________ rules-dev mailing list rules-dev(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev