Eclipse Community Forums
Forum Search:

Search      Help    Register    Login    Home
Home » Eclipse Projects » Service Oriented Architecture Tools Platform (STP) » BPMN Modeler Metamodel
BPMN Modeler Metamodel [message #374215] Sat, 18 August 2007 11:45 Go to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: rb_account.yahoo.de

Hello,

I just downloaded the stp project and used BPMN modeler which is pretty =
=

impressive.

Writing a thesis about bpmn/xpdl/bpel, I came up with the following =

questions:
1. Why do you use your own Metamodel when there exists the XML Process =

Definition Language 2.0 (XPDL), which defines the abstract syntax for BP=
MN?

2. I would like to use your modeler because:
- it's based on EMF and GMF
- it supports all (?) shapes

However, I would need to extend the Metamodel in order to use advanced =

features like PartnerLinkTypes, PartnerLinks etc.
I could use the Annotations-Feature which is described in the tutorial. =
=

However, I would prefer to use a metamodel-based approach with specific =
=

Metaelements for all necessary features.
With this thoughts in mind, I came up with the idea to extend the =

bpmn-metamodel with the elements I need. Then I simply generate the code=
=

for the EMF Tree editor plugin based on the GeneratorModel. I could then=
=

model my bpmn-model with the STP-BPMN-Modeler and extend the model with =
=

the EMF based editor.

However, the output of the EMF based editor and the BPMN editor are not =
=

the same and I am not able to open the BPMN output with the EMF generate=
d =

editor

BPMN output:
*********************************************
<?xml version=3D"1.0" encoding=3D"UTF-8"?>
<bpmn:BpmnDiagram xmi:version=3D"2.0" xmlns:xmi=3D"http://www.omg.org/XM=
I" =

xmlns:bpmn=3D"http://stp.eclipse.org/bpmn" =

xmlns:ecore=3D"http://www.eclipse.org/emf/2002/Ecore" =

xmi:id=3D"_-CiFcEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg" iD=3D"_-CVRIEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg">
<pools xmi:type=3D"bpmn:Pool" xmi:id=3D"_-qD_gUzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg" =

iD=3D"_-qD_gEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg">
<vertices xmi:type=3D"bpmn:Activity" xmi:id=3D"_-znkIUzhEdyNL4XXdWF=
XDg" =

iD=3D"_-znkIEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg"/>
</pools>
</bpmn:BpmnDiagram>


EMF Tree output
******************************************************
<?xml version=3D"1.0" encoding=3D"UTF-8"?>
<bpmn:BpmnDiagram xmlns:xsi=3D"http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance=
" =

xmlns:bpmn=3D"http://stp.eclipse.org/bpmn">
<pools>
<vertices xsi:type=3D"bpmn:Activity"/>
</pools>
</bpmn:BpmnDiagram>


Did you generate the stp-bpmn-modeler code with emf?
If so: Why are there differences in the output?
Are there any possibilities to use the emf tree editor on stp-bmn-modele=
r =

files?

Best regards

Rainer Bernhard
Re: BPMN Modeler Metamodel [message #374217 is a reply to message #374215] Wed, 29 August 2007 06:07 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: atoulme.intalio.com

Hi Rainer,
please see comments inline.

Rainer Bernhard wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just downloaded the stp project and used BPMN modeler which is pretty
> impressive.
>
> Writing a thesis about bpmn/xpdl/bpel, I came up with the following
> questions:
> 1. Why do you use your own Metamodel when there exists the XML Process
> Definition Language 2.0 (XPDL), which defines the abstract syntax for BPMN?
Not sure what you mean. BPMN does not at this point determines how to
serialize its contents, so we went for a simple model that supports the
visual shapes. XPDL, AFAIK, is a handy language to do workflow that also
supports the visual notation.
>
> 2. I would like to use your modeler because:
> - it's based on EMF and GMF
> - it supports all (?) shapes
We are working on that, we still miss the Group shape. Any contribution
in that area is very welcome ! :)
>
> However, I would need to extend the Metamodel in order to use advanced
> features like PartnerLinkTypes, PartnerLinks etc.
> I could use the Annotations-Feature which is described in the tutorial.
> However, I would prefer to use a metamodel-based approach with specific
> Metaelements for all necessary features.
> With this thoughts in mind, I came up with the idea to extend the
> bpmn-metamodel with the elements I need. Then I simply generate the code
> for the EMF Tree editor plugin based on the GeneratorModel. I could then
> model my bpmn-model with the STP-BPMN-Modeler and extend the model with
> the EMF based editor.
>
> However, the output of the EMF based editor and the BPMN editor are not
> the same and I am not able to open the BPMN output with the EMF
> generated editor
>
> BPMN output:
> *********************************************
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <bpmn:BpmnDiagram xmi:version="2.0" xmlns:xmi="http://www.omg.org/XMI"
> xmlns:bpmn="http://stp.eclipse.org/bpmn"
> xmlns:ecore="http://www.eclipse.org/emf/2002/Ecore"
> xmi:id="_-CiFcEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg" iD="_-CVRIEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg">
> <pools xmi:type="bpmn:Pool" xmi:id="_-qD_gUzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg"
> iD="_-qD_gEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg">
> <vertices xmi:type="bpmn:Activity" xmi:id="_-znkIUzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg"
> iD="_-znkIEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg"/>
> </pools>
> </bpmn:BpmnDiagram>
>
>
> EMF Tree output
> ******************************************************
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <bpmn:BpmnDiagram xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
> xmlns:bpmn="http://stp.eclipse.org/bpmn">
> <pools>
> <vertices xsi:type="bpmn:Activity"/>
> </pools>
> </bpmn:BpmnDiagram>

Well, I never tried that. We use annotations as they don't get in the
way of GMF.
>
>
> Did you generate the stp-bpmn-modeler code with emf?
Sure.
> If so: Why are there differences in the output?
I don't know, but we certainly generate some attributes, like the BPMN
id, unlike the EMF tree editor, where you have to specify them all.
> Are there any possibilities to use the emf tree editor on
> stp-bmn-modeler files?
Yes, but it's painful. You can modify the semantic model, but the
graphical model (bpmn_diagram) needs to follow.
Most of the time, the canonical edit policies will generate the missing
diagram elements. But this is not tested at this point, so I cannot be
sure for certain. If you choose this path and encounters errors, you
should address the GMF newsgroup.
>
> Best regards
>
> Rainer Bernhard

Regards,

Antoine

--
Intalio, the Open Source BPMS Company

<a href="http://www.intalio.com">http://www.intalio.com</a>
<a href="http://bpms.intalio.com">Community website</a>
Re: BPMN Modeler Metamodel [message #374219 is a reply to message #374217] Sat, 01 September 2007 17:28 Go to previous messageGo to next message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: rb_account.yahoo.de

Thanks for your reply!

> 1. Why do you use your own Metamodel when there exists the XML Process
> Definition Language 2.0 (XPDL), which defines the abstract syntax for
> BPMN?
> Not sure what you mean. BPMN does not at this point determines how to
> serialize its contents, so we went for a simple model that supports the
> visual shapes. XPDL, AFAIK, is a handy language to do workflow that also
> supports the visual notation.

The Workflow Management Coalition aligned the XML Process Definition
Language to BPMN in its new version 2.0.
Although the BPMN standard does not state anything about serializing a
model, XPDL should be (in my opinion) the preferred syntax.

I need to specify PartnerLinkTypes and PartnerLinks so that I can
transform the model to BPEL - XPDL provides the necessary elements which
can be referenced by Activities. I hesitate to specify all this with
annotations.

In the wiki you outlined an article on the mapping of bpmn to bpel. Are
you currently working on this?

Regards

Rainer Bernhard
Re: BPMN Modeler Metamodel [message #374220 is a reply to message #374219] Sun, 02 September 2007 18:55 Go to previous message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: atoulme.intalio.com

Rainer Bernhard wrote:
> Thanks for your reply!
>
>> 1. Why do you use your own Metamodel when there exists the XML Process
>> Definition Language 2.0 (XPDL), which defines the abstract syntax for
>> BPMN?
>> Not sure what you mean. BPMN does not at this point determines how to
>> serialize its contents, so we went for a simple model that supports
>> the visual shapes. XPDL, AFAIK, is a handy language to do workflow
>> that also supports the visual notation.
>
> The Workflow Management Coalition aligned the XML Process Definition
> Language to BPMN in its new version 2.0.
> Although the BPMN standard does not state anything about serializing a
> model, XPDL should be (in my opinion) the preferred syntax.
Well we just wanted something that worked, so we went for something simple.

>
> I need to specify PartnerLinkTypes and PartnerLinks so that I can
> transform the model to BPEL - XPDL provides the necessary elements which
> can be referenced by Activities. I hesitate to specify all this with
> annotations.
>
> In the wiki you outlined an article on the mapping of bpmn to bpel. Are
> you currently working on this?
I work for Intalio. We have a complete tool that does this mapping.
And you can get it for free at http://bpms.intalio.com

Regards,

Antoine

--
Intalio, the Open Source BPMS Company

<a href="http://www.intalio.com">http://www.intalio.com</a>
<a href="http://bpms.intalio.com">Community website</a>
Re: BPMN Modeler Metamodel [message #592985 is a reply to message #374215] Wed, 29 August 2007 06:07 Go to previous message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: atoulme.intalio.com

Hi Rainer,
please see comments inline.

Rainer Bernhard wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I just downloaded the stp project and used BPMN modeler which is pretty
> impressive.
>
> Writing a thesis about bpmn/xpdl/bpel, I came up with the following
> questions:
> 1. Why do you use your own Metamodel when there exists the XML Process
> Definition Language 2.0 (XPDL), which defines the abstract syntax for BPMN?
Not sure what you mean. BPMN does not at this point determines how to
serialize its contents, so we went for a simple model that supports the
visual shapes. XPDL, AFAIK, is a handy language to do workflow that also
supports the visual notation.
>
> 2. I would like to use your modeler because:
> - it's based on EMF and GMF
> - it supports all (?) shapes
We are working on that, we still miss the Group shape. Any contribution
in that area is very welcome ! :)
>
> However, I would need to extend the Metamodel in order to use advanced
> features like PartnerLinkTypes, PartnerLinks etc.
> I could use the Annotations-Feature which is described in the tutorial.
> However, I would prefer to use a metamodel-based approach with specific
> Metaelements for all necessary features.
> With this thoughts in mind, I came up with the idea to extend the
> bpmn-metamodel with the elements I need. Then I simply generate the code
> for the EMF Tree editor plugin based on the GeneratorModel. I could then
> model my bpmn-model with the STP-BPMN-Modeler and extend the model with
> the EMF based editor.
>
> However, the output of the EMF based editor and the BPMN editor are not
> the same and I am not able to open the BPMN output with the EMF
> generated editor
>
> BPMN output:
> *********************************************
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <bpmn:BpmnDiagram xmi:version="2.0" xmlns:xmi="http://www.omg.org/XMI"
> xmlns:bpmn="http://stp.eclipse.org/bpmn"
> xmlns:ecore="http://www.eclipse.org/emf/2002/Ecore"
> xmi:id="_-CiFcEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg" iD="_-CVRIEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg">
> <pools xmi:type="bpmn:Pool" xmi:id="_-qD_gUzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg"
> iD="_-qD_gEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg">
> <vertices xmi:type="bpmn:Activity" xmi:id="_-znkIUzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg"
> iD="_-znkIEzhEdyNL4XXdWFXDg"/>
> </pools>
> </bpmn:BpmnDiagram>
>
>
> EMF Tree output
> ******************************************************
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
> <bpmn:BpmnDiagram xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance"
> xmlns:bpmn="http://stp.eclipse.org/bpmn">
> <pools>
> <vertices xsi:type="bpmn:Activity"/>
> </pools>
> </bpmn:BpmnDiagram>

Well, I never tried that. We use annotations as they don't get in the
way of GMF.
>
>
> Did you generate the stp-bpmn-modeler code with emf?
Sure.
> If so: Why are there differences in the output?
I don't know, but we certainly generate some attributes, like the BPMN
id, unlike the EMF tree editor, where you have to specify them all.
> Are there any possibilities to use the emf tree editor on
> stp-bmn-modeler files?
Yes, but it's painful. You can modify the semantic model, but the
graphical model (bpmn_diagram) needs to follow.
Most of the time, the canonical edit policies will generate the missing
diagram elements. But this is not tested at this point, so I cannot be
sure for certain. If you choose this path and encounters errors, you
should address the GMF newsgroup.
>
> Best regards
>
> Rainer Bernhard

Regards,

Antoine

--
Intalio, the Open Source BPMS Company

<a href="http://www.intalio.com">http://www.intalio.com</a>
<a href="http://bpms.intalio.com">Community website</a>
Re: BPMN Modeler Metamodel [message #593007 is a reply to message #374217] Sat, 01 September 2007 17:28 Go to previous message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: rb_account.yahoo.de

Thanks for your reply!

> 1. Why do you use your own Metamodel when there exists the XML Process
> Definition Language 2.0 (XPDL), which defines the abstract syntax for
> BPMN?
> Not sure what you mean. BPMN does not at this point determines how to
> serialize its contents, so we went for a simple model that supports the
> visual shapes. XPDL, AFAIK, is a handy language to do workflow that also
> supports the visual notation.

The Workflow Management Coalition aligned the XML Process Definition
Language to BPMN in its new version 2.0.
Although the BPMN standard does not state anything about serializing a
model, XPDL should be (in my opinion) the preferred syntax.

I need to specify PartnerLinkTypes and PartnerLinks so that I can
transform the model to BPEL - XPDL provides the necessary elements which
can be referenced by Activities. I hesitate to specify all this with
annotations.

In the wiki you outlined an article on the mapping of bpmn to bpel. Are
you currently working on this?

Regards

Rainer Bernhard
Re: BPMN Modeler Metamodel [message #593022 is a reply to message #374219] Sun, 02 September 2007 18:55 Go to previous message
Eclipse User
Originally posted by: atoulme.intalio.com

Rainer Bernhard wrote:
> Thanks for your reply!
>
>> 1. Why do you use your own Metamodel when there exists the XML Process
>> Definition Language 2.0 (XPDL), which defines the abstract syntax for
>> BPMN?
>> Not sure what you mean. BPMN does not at this point determines how to
>> serialize its contents, so we went for a simple model that supports
>> the visual shapes. XPDL, AFAIK, is a handy language to do workflow
>> that also supports the visual notation.
>
> The Workflow Management Coalition aligned the XML Process Definition
> Language to BPMN in its new version 2.0.
> Although the BPMN standard does not state anything about serializing a
> model, XPDL should be (in my opinion) the preferred syntax.
Well we just wanted something that worked, so we went for something simple.

>
> I need to specify PartnerLinkTypes and PartnerLinks so that I can
> transform the model to BPEL - XPDL provides the necessary elements which
> can be referenced by Activities. I hesitate to specify all this with
> annotations.
>
> In the wiki you outlined an article on the mapping of bpmn to bpel. Are
> you currently working on this?
I work for Intalio. We have a complete tool that does this mapping.
And you can get it for free at http://bpms.intalio.com

Regards,

Antoine

--
Intalio, the Open Source BPMS Company

<a href="http://www.intalio.com">http://www.intalio.com</a>
<a href="http://bpms.intalio.com">Community website</a>
Previous Topic:STP Europa on a Intel MacBook Pro
Next Topic:Problems with SCA HelloWorld example.
Goto Forum:
  


Current Time: Wed Jul 23 22:33:25 EDT 2014

Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.01713 seconds