RNC modules are needed to redefine attribute lists of all Deliberation elements

[greenTara]

I have created a new redefining module for And and Or that can serve as a template.
There are two And types in Deliberation RuleML - And-inner and And-query
The difference in Deliberation is that And-query allows closure attributes while And-inner does not.
The type definition of the And elements has two attribute lists, one for the attributes with default values And-Query-datt.choice and the other for the attributes with no default values reAnd-Query.attlist.

In the XSD of Reaction RuleML, And is given the operator-interface attribute list, which contains type?, style?, scope? and closure? in the consumer dialect, and also arity?, card?, weight?, mode? and per-rel?.
In addition the XSD includes the direction attribute optionally in this group.

To redefine the RNC type for And, we would need to make the pattern And-Query-datt.choice empty
And-Query-datt.choice |= empty
and give reAnd-Query.attlist the operator-interface pattern
reAnd-Query.attlist &= operator-interface.attlist?

In the RNC, the common attributes are included in the operator-interface.attlist, so there is no need to explicitly add these.

When Deliberation RuleML expressivity is FOL, then the And element is allowed to have an optional mapClosure attribute as well. This is not accommodated in Reaction RuleML, but there is no loss of expressivity, as the quantifications can always be expressed explicitly.

[greenTara]

The redefining modules, named something like
drrr_rule_att_expansion_module.rnc
have been defined for And, Or, Implies, Rule

Additional modules are needed for Atom, Equal, Neg, Naf, (Forall and Exists), Expr and the terms Ind, Data, Skolem, Reify, Var
as well as Time, Spatial, Interval and the spatial-temporal operators (for complete consistency).

It makes sense to write redefinition modules to bring the Deliberation RuleML elements up to a state with no attributes with default values, since that is the target for the next release.

It doesn't make much sense to regress new elements, like Time, etc to take attributes with default values and then write another module to redefine them away.
One strategy would be simply not allow the attributes with default values (@Material, @direction, @per) on these new elements in the consumer sublanguage, and bring them in without the default values in the full syntax. The principle is that there should be a common intersection of the consumer sublanguage and Deliberation RuleML that captures the specified (1.0) behavior of these elements with regard to default values. However, this would mean that the consumer language is not truly a sublanguage of Reaction RuleML.