[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [ebxml-bp] RE: ebBP / BPMN extensions
> I am a bit confused here. My impression on BPMN is that it's basically > a graphical notation. Given this, when we say we can merge BPSS and > BPEL using BPMN, does it mean only that we can merge them onto a same > picture? Technically, I guess WSDL will be the guy to link BPSS and > BPEL up. Am I on the right track? Please comment. > Regards, -Patrick > > > Dale Moberg wrote: > >> I have one initial question. >> >> It seems to me that BPMN could effectively merge a BPSS with a BPEL >> (or a choregraphy with an orchestration) because it can cover both >> aspects. >> >> Might this not be a way to connect BPSS or WS-CDL with BPEL for the >> purposes of a unified display? That way the XML instances could still >> be used separately for different tasks, and we wouldn't have to worry >> about how to annotate BPSS with BPEL bits to cover orchestration? >> >> >> Dale >> >> PS: >> I also need to find a good pointer back to a summary on the BPMN >> graphical constructs because some ot the arrows seem funny... >> >> Are the arrow heads just links or do they indicate flow or both? >> >> Is the clock a timer, indicates a possible delay, or ?? >> >> Looks promising at a high level though. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> *From:* Jean-Jacques Dubray [mailto:jeanjadu@Attachmate.com] >> *Sent:* Sunday, August 22, 2004 11:06 PM >> *To:* Monica Martin; Dale Moberg >> *Cc:* Stephen A White; ebXML BP >> *Subject:* ebBP / BPMN extensions >> >> This is my proposal for a few extensions to BPMN to be able to >> represent the choreography of collaborations. Here is an example >> (Process PO collaboration). >> >> >> >> >> The double line activity represent a business transaction (we may >> want to use special symbols or lining scheme for indicating the >> need for or lack of signals) >> >> >> The dashed line represent the direction (initiating to responder), >> the response flow is not indicating. When two flows cross the >> activity (e.g. Cancel) it means that both parties can initiate >> that transaction. >> >> >> Optionally, we can represent the message flow (PO / Ack PO). >> >> >> The little circle on each side of the BTA represent an endpoint. >> The private process connects to these end points (not fully >> represented here). >> >> >> I had to create a new gateway which acts as both a fork and a >> join. This means that change PO and Cancel PO can happen as many >> times as we need to, until a time out occurs. Note that the >> semantic of a fork gateway in a collaboration means that the BTA >> is enabled, not that it is necessarily executed. >> >> >> It is start is agreeable, I will do a complete analysis of what >> maps and does not map to a collaboration. >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> >> JJ- >> >> >> > > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]