Comments on: Business Rule Interchange: Fantasy or Fact of Life http://blogs.gartner.com/jim_sinur/2008/12/29/business-rule-interchange-fantasy-or-fact-of-life/ A member of the Gartner Blog Network Tue, 07 Feb 2012 18:21:18 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Paul Vincent http://blogs.gartner.com/jim_sinur/2008/12/29/business-rule-interchange-fantasy-or-fact-of-life/comment-page-1/#comment-910 Paul Vincent Fri, 09 Jan 2009 14:06:14 +0000 http://blogs.gartner.com/jim_sinur/2008/12/29/business-rule-interchange-fantasy-or-fact-of-life/#comment-910 An interesting perspective: there is no BRMS vendor who has expressed an interest in supporting multiple rule engines and representations to date (indeed, BRMS vendors don't event support their own legacy rule engines in their BRMSs). Although biased (co-chair for PRR and contributor to RIF) I agree with James: PRR (development level) and RIF (executable level) are the likely results for software-executable rules. SBVR is more about policies in business (not software) language, and ODM / OWL is more about knowledge representation (also covered by one of the RIF dialects too). JSR94 isn't about rule representation at all (its an API for rule engines). RuleML is more an academic project and could be viewed as a backup in case RIF fails (unlikely given its backing). SBVR could play a role in rule management, but so far has not been extended (by vendors or OMG) to include the types of operational rules used in BPM (or PRR/RIF). This could be an interesting route for future BRMS standards, and maybe there will be interest in 09 for that... Cheers An interesting perspective: there is no BRMS vendor who has expressed an interest in supporting multiple rule engines and representations to date (indeed, BRMS vendors don’t event support their own legacy rule engines in their BRMSs).

Although biased (co-chair for PRR and contributor to RIF) I agree with James: PRR (development level) and RIF (executable level) are the likely results for software-executable rules. SBVR is more about policies in business (not software) language, and ODM / OWL is more about knowledge representation (also covered by one of the RIF dialects too). JSR94 isn’t about rule representation at all (its an API for rule engines). RuleML is more an academic project and could be viewed as a backup in case RIF fails (unlikely given its backing).

SBVR could play a role in rule management, but so far has not been extended (by vendors or OMG) to include the types of operational rules used in BPM (or PRR/RIF). This could be an interesting route for future BRMS standards, and maybe there will be interest in 09 for that…

Cheers

]]> By: Jim Sinur http://blogs.gartner.com/jim_sinur/2008/12/29/business-rule-interchange-fantasy-or-fact-of-life/comment-page-1/#comment-909 Jim Sinur Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:39:25 +0000 http://blogs.gartner.com/jim_sinur/2008/12/29/business-rule-interchange-fantasy-or-fact-of-life/#comment-909 I hope you are right because we need something in place soon because rules are headed fast in multiple directions, I hope you are right because we need something in place soon because rules are headed fast in multiple directions,

]]> By: James Taylor http://blogs.gartner.com/jim_sinur/2008/12/29/business-rule-interchange-fantasy-or-fact-of-life/comment-page-1/#comment-904 James Taylor Fri, 09 Jan 2009 03:51:35 +0000 http://blogs.gartner.com/jim_sinur/2008/12/29/business-rule-interchange-fantasy-or-fact-of-life/#comment-904 I don't think SBVR is going to get it done - it's just too massive and too complex. I think we will see more take up with simpler more system-oriented approaches like the Rule Interchange Format and Production Rule Representation, especially as these standards are being designed to be compatible. JT James Taylor Author of Smart (Enough) Systems I don’t think SBVR is going to get it done – it’s just too massive and too complex. I think we will see more take up with simpler more system-oriented approaches like the Rule Interchange Format and Production Rule Representation, especially as these standards are being designed to be compatible.
JT

James Taylor
Author of Smart (Enough) Systems

]]>