• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
BPeX: A New Approach to BPMN Model Portability
 

BPeX: A New Approach to BPMN Model Portability

on

  • 1,811 views

Architecture+Processes Conference, Washington DC, April 2008, organized by WfMC

Architecture+Processes Conference, Washington DC, April 2008, organized by WfMC

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,811
Views on SlideShare
1,808
Embed Views
3

Actions

Likes
2
Downloads
30
Comments
0

2 Embeds 3

http://www.slideshare.net 2
http://www.linkedin.com 1

Accessibility

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    BPeX: A New Approach to BPMN Model Portability BPeX: A New Approach to BPMN Model Portability Presentation Transcript

    • Welcome  Michele Chinosi University of Insubria – Varese (Italy) BPeX: A New Approach to BPMN Model Portability
    • A Brief Introduction BPMN (Business Process Modeling Notation), developed by BPMI and adopted as standard by OMG (2006). WS-BPEL (Web Services – Business Process Execution Language), developed by IBM & Microsoft, adopted by OASIS as standard. Version 2.0 (2007). XPDL (XML Process Definition Language), developed by WfMC. Version 2.0 (2005). April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 2
    • A Brief Introduction BPMN is a graphical notation to model (represent) business processes WS-BPEL is an “execution language” – definition of web services orchestration – independent from BPMN XPDL stores and exchanges the process diagrams – process design format – extended to support BPMN April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 3
    • BPeX: Business Process eXtensions The BPMN-XPDL-BPEL value chain From Keith Swenson blog “Go Flow”, posted May 26, 2006 April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 4
    • BPeX: Business Process eXtensions April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 5
    • A Comparison Between WS-BPEL and XPDL WS-BPEL XPDL Expressive power Less expressive More expressive Naming convention Completely different Some names different Structure of the model Completely different Some relevant differences Native referential integrity Partially Missing Execution capabilities Full support No execution allowed Graphical information Not at all Full graphical support Validation / Analysis Complex queries Complex queries April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 6
    • Some XPDL Weaknesses in Details Elements renaming Complex conceptual model Lack of a native referential integrity Complex queries April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 7
    • Elements Renaming XPDL 2.0: comes 1 year before OMG published BPMN specification supports all the elements provided by BPMN specification maintains the possibility to describe more generic workflow diagrams avoid redundancy and duplicates BPMN XPDL Process WorkflowProcess SequenceFlow Transition SubProcess SubFlow Gateway Route / Join / Split / … April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 8
    • A Complex Conceptual Model We analyzed the XML serialization provided with the example We depicted a more high-level graphical conceptual model of the XML tree We compared the model with the Business Process Diagram April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 9
    • An Example Process This process is taken from XPDL specification [Document nr. WFMC-TC-1025, Section 8.1, pp. 109-127] and modeled using BPMN April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 10
    • A Complex Conceptual Model April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 11
    • A Complex Conceptual Model XPDL was not originally developed to represent natively BPMN diagrams XPDL has to maintain a backward compatibility with its previous version – Old names, old structure, old relationships This introduces: – more complexity – some misunderstandings – fragmentation of information April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 12
    • A Complex Conceptual Model BPMN XPDL Processes are children of Pools Pools are defined separately from elements WorkflowProcesses, referencing them through relationships Tasks are specifications of Activity Tasks are children of an elements Implementation element, descendant of an Activity block which belongs to a unique Activities element Events are directly referenced from Events are children of an Activity a Lane element element One Gateway is defined within a The Route element is defined as Lane child of an Activity April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 13
    • Lack of Native Referential Integrity Constraints All the elements do not have a unique ID ID and IDRef are of type xsd:NMTOKEN More than one element have the same ID BPMN specification requires the ID field to be “a unique Id that identifies the object from other objects within the Diagram” April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 14
    • Lack of Native Referential Integrity Constraints April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 15
    • Lack of Native Referential Integrity Constraints IDREFs are of type xsd:NMTOKEN It is possible to set as IDREF value a non- existent ID There is the need of a software tool to check the correctness of the values XPDL specification state that “The Process attribute defines the Process that is contained within the Pool” April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 16
    • Lack of Native Referential Integrity Constraints April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 17
    • Complex Queries Which Lane does the Task with Id=10 belong to? With XPDL for $x in (//Activity[@Id=10]), $y in (//Pool[@Process = //$x/ancestor::WorkflowProcess[1]/@Id]//Lane/@Name) return $y Result: /Package[1]/Pools[1]/Pool[2]/Lanes[1]/Lane[1]/@Name - Lane-0 With BPeX //Lane[//Task/@Id=10]/@Name Result: /BPD[1]/Pool[2]/Lane[1]/@Name – Lane-0 April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 18
    • BPeX: Business Process eXtensions Built from scratch Clear conceptual model Not based on WS-BPEL or XPDL It supports all BPMN elements and features It has an XML-Schema serialization It strengthens BPMN weak connections Static analysis and validation Constraints / Metrics / Extensions April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 19
    • BPeX: Business Process eXtensions ID and IDREF are defined as of types xsd:ID and xsd:IDREF We add xsd:KEY and xsd:KEYREF to enforce constraints – We can assure that a Start Event of type Message will have all and only the attributes provided by BPMN specification We can statically validate the model without using software tools April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 20
    • BPeX Conceptual Model Graphical BPMN model Graphical BPeX model April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 21
    • Example Process in BPeX April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 22
    • XPDL and BPeX comparison XPDL BPeX April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 23
    • Conclusions XPDL BPeX Expressive power More expressive Bijective correspondence Naming convention Some names different No differences Structure of the model Some relevant differences Few adjustments due Native referential integrity Missing Strong Execution capabilities No execution allowed Not yet but planned Graphical information Full graphical support Supported with extensions Analyses Complex queries required Simple queries April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 24
    • Questions? michele.chinosi@uninsubria.it http://bpex.sourceforge.net April 21-23, 2008 Michele Chinosi - Architecture & Process - 2008 Renaissance Washington, DC 25