blob: a7dc5d3dbd41263c9b6aae430000a0a3aafcc4b5 [file] [log] [blame]
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<org.eclipse.epf.uma:TaskDescription xmi:version="2.0" xmlns:xmi="" xmlns:org.eclipse.epf.uma="" xmlns:epf="" epf:version="1.5.1" xmlns:rmc="" rmc:version="7.5.1" xmi:id="-x2B_poM4twsuSvzhIuu6Zg" name="design_model_for_bre,_lYC2IGDAEdyKlZvvtnMrMg" guid="-x2B_poM4twsuSvzhIuu6Zg" authors="Jerome Boyer" changeDate="2008-09-25T11:07:07.000-0700" version="7.5.1">
This is an important activity as we do not expose an enterprise model or a physical model as&amp;nbsp;is to a rule engine.
We need to create views of such complex models. The simplest mechanism uses XML Schema definition to define the model
exchanged between the caller and the rule service. Most of the server implementation are using a Java implementation,
so it may makes sense to leverage a Java to/ from XML binding as JAXB to easily test and implement the business
services and the models.
In any cases&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;the architect and developer of the executable models need to take into account the existing
physical models and the outcomes of the rule discovery and analysis, to be sure that the rule can execute
Developing such models is done by iterations.