Hello- We are writing rules against complex objects (derived from XML) that contain nested arrays, notionally like this: Record { Detail[] recordDetails; } Detail { Activity[] yearlyActivity; } Activity { int year; } Is it really true that I must use a "from" clause to navigate the hierarchy, assuming that my main program only inserts Record into working memory? Right now, I have: rule "Long way using From" when $r: Record() $d: Detail () from $r.recordDetails $a: Activity (year == 1990) from $d.yearlyActivity then ... because I get errors if I try directly navigating the objects: rule "Short way using Dots" when Record (recordDetails.yearlyActivity.year = 1990) then ... Is it really true I can't navigate through arrays using dot notation, and I must use the from clause? This bit of awkwardness makes my rules significantly harder to read. I was hoping for something like XPath where I can navigate right through repeating elements. Apologies in advance for the naieve comparison, and thank for any hints. -- View this message in context: http://old.nabble.com/Need-help-with-syntax-for-arrays-in-rules-tp2627384... Sent from the drools - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.