A couple of months ago, we posted a new sample on our community site which is based on the UServ Product Derby scenario showcased at the Business Rules Forum. At the webcast a few weeks back, I briefly mentioned this sample as one that showcases a lot of our extensibility points and I got a few queries about it which I thought I'd clarify.

The sample we have posted is demonstrating the following things -

  • The WF Rule Engine is availably freely in the .NET Framework 3.0 as part of Windows Workflow Foundation and increases the reach of Rules to all windows developers
  • It is possible to leverage the extensibility points, and implement something like the UServ Product Derby Sample on top of the WF Rules Engine.
  • It is a framework technology that is targeted towards developers and ISVs, not towards business analysts. We expect developers and ISVs to leverage this framework technology and build higher level abstractions and tools targeted towards the business analysts. Infact, our partners InRule and AcumenBusiness have done just that.

Most vendors who participate in showcasing this at the Business Rules Forum are showing their business analyst capabilities - they're showing how to model this solution using their suite of products.

One of the webcast attendees was confused as a result after he looked at our sample. The sample is demonstrating technical feasibility and is a starting point for an ISV or developer who wants to leverage the WF Rules Engine and the .NET Framework and build richer experiences. It is not trying to showcase WF Rules as an out of box business analyst experience. The sample re-uses the RuleSet editor which is a developer UI for authoring rules and is available in the .NET Framework 3.0.