Quit being such a trouble maker! OF COURSE we don't do those kind of things! (Smart alecky Yankee drummer!)
When I mentioned the automatic rule generation, it was the stuff that we did at Ericsson on the project that we worked on together. The auto-code (class) generation from Java was done and presented by Richard Hill at one of our Java MUG meetings in Las Colinas. He showed how he could generate a Java class file, compile it and add it to an existing project. The purpose was not to show why anyone would even want to do it but just to show that it could be done. Like a lot of other things, once someone discovers that something CAN be done then someone else will probably use (or misuse) it in some application somewhere. :-)
Seriously. This is my serious face. :-| There are many things that we "should" consider, but in the heat of the battle many things are left out. There is an excellent white paper on this subject at http://www.ez-xpert.com/verifwht.html by Richard Hicks. In addition to verification criteria (Consistency, Completeness, etc.) he also mentions a lot of things that we just never consider when building a rulebase.
A. Subsumed rules.
B. Redundancy.
C. Conflicting Rules.
D. Unnecessary IF statements.
E. Circular rules.
F. Completeness.
G. Unreferenced attribute values.
H. Illegal attribute values.
I. Unreachable conclusions.
J. Dead-end IFs and goals.
Take care...
rhalsey007 wrote:
Has anyone considered the matter of Verification and Validation of these "dynamic" rules, i.e., are we sure it (the system) does what it is supposed to after one of these dynamic rules has appeared ? Of course, I haven't seen too many consider this in even the "ordinary" rules projects. Oh well, may be that it's too much to hope for !!
--
SDG
jco
---------------------------------
James C. Owen
Senior KE
Knowledgebased Systems Corporation
6314 Kelly Circle
Garland, TX 75044
972.530.2895
