I hate to learn BPM stuff by reading it in the newspaper, but that’s what happened today when my copy of SD Times arrived in the mailbox. A Page 1 headline blared Could BPMN 2.0 Make BPEL a Moot Point? Humm, BPMN 2.0… draft reviewed by OMG last June with adoption expected in September. Wow, I [...]
You may recall my dinner bet with Ismael last month. He bet I couldn’t find 3 BPM implementations that met the following criteria:
Complex process (e.g., “more than 100 steps”)
Integration with transactional systems through WSDL
Human workflow through web-based interfaces
Modeling and skeleton design done by process analysts using BPMN
Implementation done by IT people without writing code
No vendor support through [...]
Forrester’s Ken Vollmer takes issue with my inference that a BPMS truly layered on SOA must include an ESB in order to achieve the “loose coupling” promise. He writes:
I guess the one point I would argue with you is that you seem to equate SOA with ESB’s and that is not a good way to [...]
I think I know quite a bit about BPM, and while I can’t say the same about SOA yet, I’m trying hard to learn. Still, I already know enough to say that when a BPMS vendor talks about how his product is based on SOA, he’s not talking about the same SOA that the real [...]
As if we needed more evidence that BPM and SOA are uneasy allies, one of Steve Jones’s SOA Anti-Patterns, widely praised in the blogs for their hilarious wit and insight, seems to me a perfect example of how some architects still view BPM’s top-down approach as worst practice, not best. The “percolating process” anti-pattern is described [...]
David Chappell, who long ago took the position that BPEL isn’t portable so it doesn’t matter, now amplifies it with the conclusion that portability should be at the design language level, not the execution language, and the best candidate for that is BPMN. I’ve come to the same conclusion myself, on both points. John Evdemon, [...]
Recent Comments