Comments on: BPMN to BPEL: going to battle with one hand tied?

By: Jonas

Jonas — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 21:33:22 +0000

I see this specific scenario as a non-process concern. It would more likely be implemented in a human task processor. From a process perspective a review should be completed, that’s it.

By: BPMS Watch » More on BPMN-to-BPEL

BPMS Watch » More on BPMN-to-BPEL — Sat, 05 Apr 2008 01:26:00 +0000

[...] given me a much better appreciation of the problem. The problem Keith mentions is from a post by William Vambenepe who bemoans the fact that a BPMN OR-split and join in Oracle BPA Suite generates a slightly more [...]

By: WYDIWYE: The Answer to BPEL Transform Problems « Go Flow

WYDIWYE: The Answer to BPEL Transform Problems « Go Flow — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 05:54:29 +0000

[...] April 3, 2008 I just want to highlight an excellent post by William Vambenepe on the subject of BPMN to BPEL: going to battle with one hand tied? He does a very simple experiment: draw a meaningful diagram in BPMN, in this case a fairly simple [...]

By: William Vambenepe

William Vambenepe — Mon, 24 Mar 2008 18:09:41 +0000

Thanks Jean-Jacques.

Anyone who wants to think more deeply about this topic (and who likes to approach problems by looking for their underlying causes) should go read JJ’s article at InfoQ for some food for thought.

By: Jean-Jacques Dubray

Jean-Jacques Dubray — Sun, 23 Mar 2008 11:37:57 +0000

William:

I don’t know if you saw this article I wrote on a possible relationship between BPEL and BPMN. I am not sure the two can ever be mapped to each other nor it is desirable.

http://www.infoq.com/articles/seven-fallacies-of-bpm

The article also links to some work done by Marlon Dumas about lisibility & round-tripping. You will also find a link in the comments to a talented researcher at IBM Zurich: Ksenia Ryndina

JJ-

By: BPMN to BPEL: going to battle with one hand tied? « Baharé R. Heravi

BPMN to BPEL: going to battle with one hand tied? « Baharé R. Heravi — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:32:31 +0000

[...] the complete article by William [...]

By: Tammo

Tammo — Wed, 19 Mar 2008 10:34:38 +0000

Nice post. In my opinion the major problem is the lack of well-defined operational semantics in BPMN. The example in your post turns actually out to be a problem because the BPMN diagram is underspecified. What happens if none of the parties do a review? Is there a time out? What happens if a reviewer rejects the quote?
No wonder that it’s getting difficult to translate it into a technical process definition.