BPMN 2.0 is a couple weeks away from its equivalent of “code freeze” and all of a sudden there is this tidal wave of commentary on OMG’s BMI list expressing “shock” over the fact that BPMN 2.0 describes processes from the perspective of a process orchestration engine. I haven’t heard such feigned surprise and indignation since Congress “discovered” the AIG bonuses. I mean, the hidden underlying pretense of a virtual orchestration engine (if not an actual one) has been baked into BPMN since v1.0. Until now, nobody cared because tools just used the parts of BPMN visible in the diagram – the abstract flow modeling piece – and universally ignored the execution-related attributes. But now with BPMN 2.0, Oracle has flatly said (and IBM has hinted) that this will be their new executable process design language. So the connection between BPMN and execution engines is starting to sink in, apparently.
As BPMS Watch readers know, I mostly agree with the howlers that BPMN 2.0 ignores the needs of business-level modeling. (I had to personally lobby an executive at one of the Big 3 just to get the team to consider my complaint that models lacking specification of data interfaces, WSDL operation and message references were schema-invalid. Now they’re not, but it took 3 months of repeated pushing…) So yes, this bias is a problem. BPMN 2.0 could have done more to distinguish between diagrams with lax semantics, appropriate for some business-level models, and those with precise semantics, such as required for execution. But that was never a goal, and this fact has been visible (to OMG members at least) for 6 months or more.
Now it’s too late for this outrage, faux or genuine. In any event, it’s not a big deal. BPMN 2.0 will be handled by business-oriented process modelers in exactly the same way BPMN 1.x was… by ignoring the semantic details when they get in the way. At least the diagrams will be schema-valid!
7 Responses to “OMG!! It’s About Process Execution? Who Knew??”
BPMN Training
NEW! Virtual classroom Jan 25-28. Find out more!
Learn BPMN the right way. Not just compliance with the spec, but maximum effectiveness as a common visual language. Methodology, patterns, best practices, organizing complex models.... Hands-on with a tool. Loads of exercises, both in class and post-class (with individualized help, certification of proficiency). 60-day license to Process Modeler for Visio included.
Available online and in 2-day public classes. Don't be left behind.
2010 public classes Online Jan 25-28, Chicago April 21-22, San Francisco June 30-July 1, DC September 15-16, New York November 3-4. Have 10 or more students? Private 2-day classes delivered at your site, with same tool and post-class certification. Contact me for pricing and details.
BPMN Method and Style
At least the diagrams will be schema-valid!
Right, a large step into the right direction.
Bruce, I can not understand several points about new standard.
Please, answer several questions
How this new specification will impact BPMN-BPEL alliance?
Are not BPMN 2.0 and BPEL intersect now?
Is there any need in BPEL for BPMN 2.0 adopters, if BPMN 2.0 artifacts will include implementation details?
Will BPMN 2.0 models be processed by process engines directly?
Thank you in advance.
Kirill Lis
Kirill,
These questions must be answered by the implementors, e.g. Oracle, IBM, etc. Whether they position BPMN 2.0 as a replacement of BPEL or a front end to BPEL is up to them.
–Bruce
“BPMN 2.0 is a couple weeks away from its equivalent of “code freeze””
Can you say now whether it really able to replace BPEL as an execution standard or not?
Kirill
Bruce,
Thanks for the update. I found your comment to Kirill about implementors positioning BPMN as a replacement of BPEL very interesting, perhaps you could clarify in another post. My thoughts (on a not completely related subject but still related
are here
Just to be perfectly clear… I am not trying to speak for implementors re positioning BPMN vs BPEL. That is a marketing question, not a technical one. I am just comparing the specs. The data definition and mapping section is nearly the same. The human task model is aligned with BPEL4People. What part of BPEL is NOT in BPMN 2.0? I don’t see anything…
Bruce,
I am not arguing for or against, I think the discussion is worth a post rather than being buried in comments.