Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!lll-winken!lll-lcc!ames!nrl-cmf!ukma!gatech!hao!boulder!sunybcs!bingvaxu!leah!uwmcsd1!ig!agate!ucbvax!ROCKY.STANFORD.EDU!kohen
From: kohen@ROCKY.STANFORD.EDU (Abe Kohen)
Newsgroups: comp.ai.digest
Subject: Re: Software Development and Expert Systems
Message-ID: <1010@rocky.STANFORD.EDU>
Date: 3 Feb 88 02:21:03 GMT
References: <8801270004.AA12634@nrl-rjkj.arpa> <843@chorus.fr>
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Reply-To: rocky!kohen (Abe Kohen)
Organization: Stanford University Computer Science Department
Lines: 19
Approved: ailist@kl.sri.com



The query and responses seem to be geared to custom-built systems.
I'd like to ask about s/w development for expert systems using 
commercially available tools.

How do tools like S.1, Art, or Nexpert lend themselves to good s/w
engineering. Are some tools better for s/w engineering? Are they 
better (whatever that means) at the expense of clear and efficient
data representation.

It seems that S.1 has the potential for providing a good s/w engineering
environment, but it fails on data representation, and is lacking forward
chaining (vaporware not withstanding). Art has good data representation,
but doesn't (yet) integrate well into a workstation (read: Sun) environment.

How does Nexpert perform?

kohen@rocky.stanford.edu
kohen@sushi.stanford.edu