[Simon Harris]

I have some rules which assert facts based on the the non-existence of  
certain other facts. Those other facts may however come into exsistence  
based on other rules.

Once again, I'm faced with a number of choices.
Do/can I somehow use logical? I don't believe it's possible to use logical  
with not.

Or, do I use salience to force the non-existence rules to "evaluate last"
Or, do I try and invert the test somehow?
Or, is there another solution I've not thought of?
Cheers,
Simon
BTW, I think I'm beginning to build up a FAQ here ;-) I may have to put it  
up on the website.

--
Simon Harris
RedHill Consulting, Pty. Ltd.
12/55-67 Batman Street
West Melbourne VIC 3003
+61 417 505 611
http://www.redhillconsulting.com.au
--------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
--------------------------------------------------------------------