Re: ebBP 11/7/2005: Minor Changes in References to BPMN and Diagrams

[Monica J Martin <Monica.Martin@Sun.COM>]

As an update to the original diagrams for the v2.0.1 public review 
update, I have worked with Ugo Corda to determine if and how using BPMN 
we can show how ebBP can map the Business Transaction Activity to a 
series of operations.  This isn't a subprocess nor is it (really) a 
group although it shares one aspect of a group. [1]

I've included:

   1. Original diagrams (2)
   2. Updated diagrams (updated from post last week 7 November 2005) [2]

What is important here and perhaps should be considered by BPMN team is 
there is effectively no mechanism to specify a relationship between 
activity objects unless they are considered a subprocess or a 
transaction or within a pool/lane. Neither of these truly represent this 
use case. There are (at least) two levels of specification where we 
should be able to associate or relate the BTA to those operations, each 
effectively activities in their own right.

As allowable extensions, I have differentiated business messages from 
business signals (blue and green respectively for color, and used a 
heavier weight line).  The BPMN team may consider that this 
differentiation is important for intentional collaboration.

In the interim, I've used the group object and specified how our 
questions are being coordinated with BPMN team in our technical 
specification. Originally in v2.0.1 Committee Draft, we used association 
which is flow objects (activities) related to information.

If the BPMN team I've cc: herein have comments, I'd also appreciate it. 
Thanks.

[1] In BPMN, a group is used for documentation to show how one set of 
objects relates to another set of objects (such as on another diagram).
[2] 7 November 2005: 
http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/ebxml-bp/email/archives/200511/msg00019.html
public reference: 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ebxml-bp/200511/msg00019.html

> 11/7/2005 mm1: When I attended the recent OMG meeting, I met with 
> several BPMN members. We discussed potential changes in v1.1 BPMN as 
> well as our representations. Here is a suggested change to the BPMN 
> diagram for Figure 7 between a Requesting and Responding Business 
> Activity.  I'd ask that you review in light of your 
> interest/understanding of BPMN and comment if this change is 
> acceptable. Note, there have some comments provided to that BPMN team 
> in OMG about sequence and message flows, that may result in further 
> changes. Thanks.

v2.0.1-req-resp-ba.pdf