At 09:15 11/06/04, Geetha Manjunath wrote:
> For the rules language, I'd like to have some more discussion on the
> scope. Previous discussions drifted a little bit into the space of a
> "programming language" for intermediary services. Originally, the
> rules language was meant to simply indicate to an OPES processor which
> services to invoke on a given message. Also, I'd assume that we'd
> build on the previous work that was done on "P". Any thoughts?
We could start from 'P' - may need some enhancements though . But I think we
need to separate the 'runtime specification' and 'language specification' in
some form.
Could you please help. What is "P". Were is it documented?
jfc