Re: [rules-users] drools queries: strange dependency

Thanks a lot again, you made my life easy with the build instructions :) Yes I'm trying to do an integration. I have some experience with ontologies and want to experiment with drools as an alternative. OWL with reasoners like Fact ++ are pretty much good for the job, except for the fact that they handle individual data bits in quite a cumbersome way. It was because of this reason that I wanted to experiment on other ways of modeling a knowledge structure with better facilities for querying large amounts of factual data. I'm giving drools a try, but I'm not entirely sure if drools can do things as powerful as a reasoner. Basically, I'd like to be able to let the data lie (without firing any "events" until necessary) and query the inferences in a first-order logic like manner. This is very space-efficient in data-heavy scenarios. I know that this isn't the traditional way drools is designed to work. I'm trying to solve the inference problem by dynamically adding semantic classes to each object to store all the possible inferences about it, so they can be queried later. Problem with this approach is that it gets out of hand very quickly, because the enumerated number of such inferences can be HUGE even for a moderate KB. Backward chaining will eventually solve this problem, but it seems that the constructs available for that in drools queries are not too matured at the moment. For instance they don't seem to support numerical inequality operators (or I am wrong, which is also very likely). Thank you again for the quick help, Upali On 11/04/2013 14:14, Davide Sottara wrote: -- *Upali Kohomban*, PhD Research Fellow CodeGen International 29 Breybrooke Street, Colombo 02, Sri Lanka *T:* +94 112 470 740 *F:* +94 112 470 749 *W:* http://codegen.net