You're not using language very carefully, and as a result I really can't be sure of what you're asking. Rules don't fire each other, nor can activating rules cause other rules to be activated. Both "fire" and "activate" have very specific meanings in Jess.
Now, your previous example had to do with backward chaining, I think, so perhaps you're talking about backward-chaining activations, which makes what you're saying make a little more sense. But if you could come up with a *short* example that demonstrates your issue, and then tell me what happens when you run it and what you expected to happen instead, that would make it easier to help you. I think ben said salma wrote: [Charset iso-8859-1 unsupported, filtering to ASCII...] > hello, > theoretically, if one rule can be fired by one of three other rules, > normally if one rule of these is activated the main rule is activated; > i do it with an example, that i sent to you yesterday, but the main rule is > activated just by the last one declared not by the other. if i change the > order of declaration, the last one declared activate the main rule(everytime > the last one declared) > thank you > > > --------------------------------- > Yahoo! Mail r_invente le mail ! D_couvrez le nouveau Yahoo! Mail et son > interface r_volutionnaire. --------------------------------------------------------- Ernest Friedman-Hill Advanced Software Research Phone: (925) 294-2154 Sandia National Labs FAX: (925) 294-2234 PO Box 969, MS 9012 [EMAIL PROTECTED] Livermore, CA 94550 http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov -------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, send the words 'unsubscribe jess-users [EMAIL PROTECTED]' in the BODY of a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], NOT to the list (use your own address!) List problems? Notify [EMAIL PROTECTED] --------------------------------------------------------------------
