On 15/12/2010 10:16, Mark Proctor wrote:
On 15/12/2010 09:38, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
Constraining the scope of applicable when-fragment might be added on top of the current DSL syntax, providing a compatible migration path. Notice that constraining the scope is similar to the rule attribute "auto-focus", but unqualified entries may have to remain active throughout.

Expansion will have to be able to handle insertions not only for the last preceding pattern but also to other parenthesized condition phrases, e.g. eval, forall, etc.
yaml looks pretty nice these days, as the underlying document storage format.
There are two approaches to schemas in yaml that I know of:
http://rx.codesimply.com/
http://www.kuwata-lab.com/kwalify/

Mark

Mark

-W



On 15 December 2010 10:18, Mark Proctor <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    Thought I'd mention where I'd like to see DSLs go in the future,
    if anyone is interested. DSLs are template fragments that can be
    used in conjuction with each other. I'll refer to them as
    template fragments from now on.
    -Selecting one template fragment constraints which peer fragments
    may be used after it.
    -Template fragments may have nested template fragments. The
    available nested fragments are themselves constrained and
    depending on which child fragment is chosen cosntrains any
    allowed peer child fragments.
    -As well as constraining which peer or child fragments can be
    used cardinality can also be constrained.
    -The peering and nesting itself can be recursively applied,

    So what we are talking about here is something that is almost xsd
    schema like, for producing constrained documents.

    Mark

    On 15/12/2010 07:41, Wolfgang Laun wrote:
    On 13 December 2010 19:58, Edson Tirelli <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

          Hi Wolfgang,

          Mark said you would like us to take a look at some of your
        commits?
        Can you let me know which ones?


    Hi Edson,

    I have reached a state where I think changes might be committed
    - see the attached README. I'll just go through the code and add
    some comments and make sure no "noise" remains. Then I'll send
    you the zipped tarball of all changes. If there are no
    objections, I'll also commit, but I need to do this before the
    git change incapacitates me. (I just don't have the time right
    now for making this conversion, and I won't have it until
    E12/2010. Worst time of the year for doing a change like that!)

    @developers: Anybody interested in this set of changes can ask
    me for the sources.

    Best
    Wolfgang




    _______________________________________________
    rules-dev mailing list
    [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
    https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev


    _______________________________________________
    rules-dev mailing list
    [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
    https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev



_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev


_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev

_______________________________________________
rules-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/rules-dev

Reply via email to