Re: [rules-users] Preventing re-evaluation on modification of 'output' fact

What you wrote sounds fine. Having a sort of "root" object where List fields contain Odds and Ends, and some rules rely on Odds (but not Ends) being updated and others that don't it's not a good approach to make root a pattern in each rule. It's like information hiding: A rule working with Odds should not have access to Ends. A frequently given advice is: insert List elements as facts and reason with them if they represent independent entities. If necessary, locate siblings via a "parent" pointer. -W On 15 November 2011 14:29, Jamie <jshaw(a)llbean.com&gt; wrote: