While models are statements about the categories of things that may exist in business domains, rules are statements about business facts, i.e instances of those categories. Yet, given that requirements usually don’t come with categories fully and consistently defined upfront, the way rules are expressed can only be settled through requirements analysis.
As a consequence, from requirements lumps to well-formed expressions of business logic, rules will get through some metamorphosis. That raises two questions: is it possible to map those transformations, and, if it’s the case, what kind of criteria should govern the making of the rules.
The footprint of a rule is made of the categories of facts to be considered (aka rule domain), and categories of facts possibly affected (aka rule co-domain).
As far as systems are concerned, the first thing to do is to distinguish between actual contexts and symbolic representations. A naive understanding would assume rules to belong to either actual or…
View original post 1,368 more words