Talk:Business rules engine

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

An inference engine is a sub-category of a rule engine; they are not one-to-one and this is a cause of confusion for many people.

Contents

[edit] Requested move

JA: I requested admin assist to move Rule engine to Business rules engine for the reason given as "fit title to content and related articles, and to undo an ill-considered redirect", as a previous version of the content was initially under the title Business rules engine but subsequently redirected to this overly generic title, which is used more broadly in Artificial intelligence and not just in enterprise applications. Thank you, Jon Awbrey 16:36, 19 March 2006 (UTC)

Done. —Nightstallion (?) 07:37, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Is it worth investing? - PHB comment

The consensus amongst the greater intellectual population out there is that this is worth it if you have money to throw around at resources to manage them. If you are not one for vestigial thought, then perhaps you should re-consider.

unsupported comments like this have no place in wikipedia. if you can provide real-world numbers as to why rules engines are more efficient or powerful or easy to maintain when compared to other languages, i'd love to see them. if not, then this should be removed.

--192.223.226.6 16:22, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Too Java-centric?

With the mention of JSR and POJOs, this page seems too biased towards java if this article is discussing business rule engines in general. Hertzsprung 15:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)


I don't have an issue with it mentioning JSRs and POJOs, however if there are other standard interfaces for other languages just add these to a standards section. The article just needs to be expanded for other languages. Matthew - 26 March 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 20.138.1.245 (talk) 14:05, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merge

Production system, Business rules engine, production system, inference engine, all those are basically the same notion, alll these articles needs to be merged in the same document, maybe we can have differents paragraphs for each, but they are basically the same thing--Kompere (talk) 14:57, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


I would agree that there is a lot of common language between the bre and production system, however I think that production system is a confusing term and if anything should be converted in a Disambiguation page since I view a production system as meaning any system that is in production status. A similar definition can be found on Encyclopedia Britannica site.

Regarding inference engine and bre, it maybe personal opinion but I view an inference engine to be part of the ai and bre being a specialization of an inference engine. Matthew - March 27, 2008 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 20.138.1.245 (talk) 14:20, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Differentiate - vendor comment & stds developer comment

A BRE *could be* a production system (typically not in a BPM system though) and *could be* an inference engine (not in some Decision Table tools though and most BRMSs that optionally generate Java code rather than deploy to Rete...).

[edit] Notes on the term

Production (Rules) Systems is an older term, and is not commonly used today. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AWebEditor (talk • contribs) 23:34, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Merge with Inference Engine?

Inference engines are types of rule engines, so if the pages are merged, Business Rules Engine should remain as the title. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AWebEditor (talk • contribs) 23:40, 9 June 2008 (UTC)