http://www.brsilver.com/wordpress/2006/07/06/thoughts-on-bpmn-20/ Bruce Silver's blog on business process management Sat, 27 Feb 2010 10:22:38 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 http://www.brsilver.com/wordpress/2006/07/06/thoughts-on-bpmn-20/comment-page-1/#comment-2366 Is a CEP application a “Managed Process”? » TIBCO’s Complex Event Processing Blog Tue, 18 Sep 2007 11:37:04 +0000 http://www.brsilver.com/wordpress/2006/07/06/thoughts-on-bpmn-20/#comment-2366 [...] [*2] The BPMN 2.0 RFP has recently been published, and it seems BPMN is to be extended to include some of the other process organization types (like choreography [*4]) currently defined via BPDM. Controversially, BPMN 2.0 is proposed to be renamed to Business Process Model and Notation, and meant to include a persistence mechanism (good news, except there is already a well-adopted persistence mechanism in XPDL, and bad news if this (a) bloats BPMN, (b) causes the BPMN standard to be forked, and (c) dilutes the concept of BPDM by tying it to just processes that BPMN covers). This is causing lots of discussion, naturally, which hopefully will translate to more assistance/guidance being given to the OMG team(s) working on these specs/proposals. [...] [...] [*2] The BPMN 2.0 RFP has recently been published, and it seems BPMN is to be extended to include some of the other process organization types (like choreography [*4]) currently defined via BPDM. Controversially, BPMN 2.0 is proposed to be renamed to Business Process Model and Notation, and meant to include a persistence mechanism (good news, except there is already a well-adopted persistence mechanism in XPDL, and bad news if this (a) bloats BPMN, (b) causes the BPMN standard to be forked, and (c) dilutes the concept of BPDM by tying it to just processes that BPMN covers). This is causing lots of discussion, naturally, which hopefully will translate to more assistance/guidance being given to the OMG team(s) working on these specs/proposals. [...]

]]> http://www.brsilver.com/wordpress/2006/07/06/thoughts-on-bpmn-20/comment-page-1/#comment-267 BPMS Watch » BPMN Update from OMG Tue, 17 Oct 2006 17:51:43 +0000 http://www.brsilver.com/wordpress/2006/07/06/thoughts-on-bpmn-20/#comment-267 [...] As far as where BPMN going, I was a bit underwhelmed.  Rumors of an imminent BPMN 2.0 last summer were nowhere close to the truth.  In spring of 2007 we should see BPMN 1.1, which makes minor tweaks to the current spec, cleaning up the semantics of details such as Link events and Exclusive Merge gateways.  BPDM and a schema for BPMN?  Don’t hold your breath.  When asked about this at his session, Stephen weakly offered WfMC’s XPDL 2.0.  That’s not OMG’s official position, obviously.  But to me, OMG’s lack of urgency on this issue is unconscionable.  What about some kind of compliance guidelines, such as a list of MUST-SUPPORT objects and attributes?  Today any tool that has rounded rectangles and swimlanes claims to be BPMN.  Stephen was vague on this, but it sounded like a possibility.  However, OMG will not be enforcing or certifying compliance.  [...] [...] As far as where BPMN going, I was a bit underwhelmed.  Rumors of an imminent BPMN 2.0 last summer were nowhere close to the truth.  In spring of 2007 we should see BPMN 1.1, which makes minor tweaks to the current spec, cleaning up the semantics of details such as Link events and Exclusive Merge gateways.  BPDM and a schema for BPMN?  Don’t hold your breath.  When asked about this at his session, Stephen weakly offered WfMC’s XPDL 2.0.  That’s not OMG’s official position, obviously.  But to me, OMG’s lack of urgency on this issue is unconscionable.  What about some kind of compliance guidelines, such as a list of MUST-SUPPORT objects and attributes?  Today any tool that has rounded rectangles and swimlanes claims to be BPMN.  Stephen was vague on this, but it sounded like a possibility.  However, OMG will not be enforcing or certifying compliance.  [...]

]]> http://www.brsilver.com/wordpress/2006/07/06/thoughts-on-bpmn-20/comment-page-1/#comment-164 BPMS Watch » Does BPMN Belong to BPEL? Fri, 21 Jul 2006 05:10:34 +0000 http://www.brsilver.com/wordpress/2006/07/06/thoughts-on-bpmn-20/#comment-164 [...] Assaf Arkin guest-posts an impassioned love-hate note to BPMN on IT|Redux.  I admit I only understood about half of it, and I think you’d need to have stayed awake through many a BPEL TC conference call to get most of the references.  His first core assumption - that BPMN’s deeper purpose is to provide process design portability, not just a drawing - is one I agree with (e.g. here and here and also here)… but it’s hard for me to accept his second one, which is that a BPMN independent of BPEL makes portability impossible, and we should just accept that BPMN’s purpose is to be the notation for BPEL.  [...] [...] Assaf Arkin guest-posts an impassioned love-hate note to BPMN on IT|Redux.  I admit I only understood about half of it, and I think you’d need to have stayed awake through many a BPEL TC conference call to get most of the references.  His first core assumption – that BPMN’s deeper purpose is to provide process design portability, not just a drawing - is one I agree with (e.g. here and here and also here)… but it’s hard for me to accept his second one, which is that a BPMN independent of BPEL makes portability impossible, and we should just accept that BPMN’s purpose is to be the notation for BPEL.  [...]

]]>