|
1
|
- Bonnie O’Neil
- Westridge Consulting/Apex Solutions
|
|
2
|
- How Business Rules have Evolved
- Summary of Tool Classes
- The Future? The Goal
|
|
3
|
- Analysis/Requirements Gathering
- Metadata
- Coding Paradigm
- AI/Engine
- Grammar/English Language
|
|
4
|
- Started out as an Analysis Approach
- A Better Way to do Analysis
- Major Players
- Ron Ross
- Barbara von Halle
- Emphasis on Requirements Gathering
- Not code-oriented
|
|
5
|
- Zachman Framework Debate
- BRs as Metadata
- Powerful Business Knowledge
- Major Players
- David Hay
- Alan Kolber
- Keri Anderson-Healy
- Terry Moriarty
|
|
6
|
- Write applications as BR components
- Just a Better Way to Program
- No concern with linking with natural language
- Problem seen as too complex
- Easier maintenance
- Major Players
- Paul Dorsey
- David Wendelken
|
|
7
|
- Rule Engines
- Conflict resolution a hard problem
- AI can help
|
|
8
|
- Grammars introduced
- Work out of the Netherlands
- Bonnie O’Neil: basic grammar, 1997
- Usoft
- Terry Halpin
- eFuturia:TMBR
- Goal: to hook English language to code
- BR maintained by business people
|
|
9
|
- Capture and Classification tools (BR Repository)
- Engine-oriented
- Rules engine
- Some app help, mostly 3GL
- Provide conflict resolution
- Example: Brokat (formerly Blaze Software, Neuron Data)
|
|
10
|
- Visual Development Environment
- Rules as business logic
- GUI development
- Example: Versata
|
|
11
|
- Information Systems should be maintained by business people
- Business rules should be located centrally, available ubiquitously
- Business rules should be expressed in English language but must also be
executable
- Business rules should be able to be changed and instantly reflected in
systems
|