Comments on: BPMN-BPEL in Perspective

By: BPMN to BPEL: be careful « TINAG - This Is Not A Guide 2 Intalio

BPMN to BPEL: be careful « TINAG - This Is Not A Guide 2 Intalio — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:21:35 +0000

[...] also invite you to read Mr. Bruce Silver discusses the distance from BPMN to BPEL, from market strategy to the issues related to the implementation of BPEL [...]

By: BPEL to BPMN: be careful « TINAG - This Is Not A Guide 2 Intalio

BPEL to BPMN: be careful « TINAG - This Is Not A Guide 2 Intalio — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 21:20:42 +0000

[...] also invite you to read Mr. Bruce Silver discusses the distance from BPMN to BPEL, from market strategy to the issues related to the implementation of BPEL [...]

By: Primatek Consulting Blog by Eric Charpentier » Blog Archive » On BPMN, BPEL and XPDL

Fri, 21 Nov 2008 14:29:24 +0000

[...] BPMN-BPEL in Perspective by Bruce Silver [...]

By: Bruce Silver has the right idea about BPMN and BPEL…but » VOSibilities

Fri, 07 Nov 2008 15:41:44 +0000

[...] wanted to respond to Bruce’s post with what we believe is important to understand about the differences between BPMN and BPEL and why [...]

By: sfrancis

sfrancis — Thu, 06 Nov 2008 16:34:05 +0000

#Miguel – problem is, the vendors don’t all export XPDL. ok, that’s only part of the problem. but its a big one. we want to test vendors for compliance to the BPMN spec. we still need to draw that compliance model (the model that illustrates compliance) to make sure vendors are really allowing authors to draw BPMN diagrams.

Secondly, it would greatly improve the utility of this compliance model if it had storage (e.g. XPDL, BPEL, BPMN 2.0) that is portable or at least “agnostic”. I think XPDL might meet the need of being agnostic, but practically isn’t portable due to lack of support, and lack of vendor commitment to future support. BPMN 2.0 (in whatever form) seems to have a better chance of getting this support from vendors… and BPEL has reasonably good vendor support, but doesn’t have a high-fidelity two-way mapping between BPMN and BPEL. (for purpose of compliance, the mapping needs to be two-way or “native” imho…)

By: jonase

jonase — Sun, 02 Nov 2008 08:58:04 +0000

Microsoft just announced the “M” language under the slogan – models will not succeed if they can’t be read in a text editor. Is it that simple – BPMN needs a textual representation, not just the boxes and arrows?

I know M is not comparable to BPEL, but from a programmer/code perspective.

By: BPMN/BPEL posts « MyNotePad

BPMN/BPEL posts « MyNotePad — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 08:33:59 +0000

[...] BPMN-BPEL in Perspective: [B. Silver, Oct 25, 2008] [...]

By: BPMN « Euroside

BPMN « Euroside — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 23:10:42 +0000

[...] Bruce Silver has recently posted a popular piece on BPMN that reminded me of some comments made by Assaf Arkin at the Intalio User Conference way [...]

By: valdesfm

valdesfm — Wed, 29 Oct 2008 08:40:40 +0000

#Bruce:

My team and myself we are indeed open to work with OMG guys, or with any other consortium/organization to go further on BPMN execution semantics.

However, I currently see some of those efforts, i.e BPMLab, as just a promotion channel of BPEL focused on one BPM provider products and components

#sfrancis:

The interchange format between BPMN tools is already available: XPDL2.

best regards,
Miguel Valdes

By: Process for the Enterprise » Blog Archive » Compliance for the BPMN Specification… Shooting the Moon?

Wed, 29 Oct 2008 04:39:48 +0000

[...] has been a flurry of discussion around compliance for BPMN specifications, particularly on Bruce Silver’s blog, and with additional commentary from Ismael’s [...]