> It looks like you can only define rules in XML - do you plan to support
> any other representation in the future ?
Howdy Robert--
There's support for any one to write any representation they want.
I did XML originally because:
1) dom4j (by your friend'n'mine, James Strachan) makes
it easy, allowing me to follow "ship early and often."
A custom syntax would've taken longer to get written
and out of the door.
2) It's syntax is pretty much orthogonal to the Java
in the conditions and actions. With a custom parser,
chances are the characters '{' and '}' would have
meanings to the rules-file syntax, in addition to
the normal java action syntax. Ambiguity is sometimes
difficult to work around.
If you have a preferred syntax, let's start a discussion here
to flesh it out, and we can certainly get it into the project.
As of the end-of-the-month, I'm unemployed (voluntarily), and thus
will have more time to hack on these things.
btw, enjoyed the JDJ article regarding JMS/Messenger, etc by
some Spirit-soft guy. Didn't read the complete byline, so I
don't remember who wrote it.
-bob
_______________________________________________
drools-interest mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/drools-interest
