|Re: Data flows in BPMN 2.0 Modeler [message #871012 is a reply to message #821406]
||Thu, 10 May 2012 10:27
| Henning Losert
Registered: March 2012
thanks a lot for the great work on the BPMN 2.0 Modeler so far. I just got around to checking out the latest version from git today and it looks great so far.
First off, I'm currently working on a project with BPMN2 data flow aspects and for that I need an editor to create process definitions with spec compliant data flow in them. I know I could use the BPMN2 tree editor from the org.eclipse.bpmn2.editor package but that becomes very annoying very quickly. So I gave the BPMN 2.0 Modeler a try (without the jBPM5 profile).
I like the consistent handling of DataStore and DataObject a lot, just a few niggles I still have:
In the property sheet of e.g. Task in section I/O parameters I see no way of specifying the type of the created DataInputs/Outputs (set the itemSubjectRef to some ItemDefinition).
The parameter mapping is really confusing right now. I don't see a (straightforward) way to map a DataInput/Output to a DataObject. (I guess I could use an Assignment or a Transformation for that, but that would require me to manually write some e.g. XPath expression)
There should be an option "Map to DataObject" that works similarly to "Map to a Property".
And, maybe related to this, I don't see a way to visualize DataAssociations on the diagram.
I actually have a usage scenario in mind how the data flows could be modeled from a user's perspective:
- I create a Task t1 on the diagram
- I create a DataObject d1 on the diagram
- I set the type of d1 to some pre-existing or newly created ItemDefinition
- I drag a DataAssociation from d1 to t1
- Now the editor should look for compatible DataInputs in t1's InputOutputSpecification and offer to map to one of those or, if none were found, offer to create a new DataInput in t1
(- The other way around, dragging a DataAssociation from t1 to d1, should work similarly just with DataOutputs)
I have no idea how much work this is, but I think it would be a huge step towards more spec coverage and usability when dealing with data.
Should I open an enhancement bugzilla for this?
Thanks again for the great work, it is much appreciated.
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.03741 seconds