|
|
|
| Re: Question:Does this developing environment suitable? [message #613883 is a reply to message #613881] |
Thu, 20 March 2008 20:45  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: dfx_2006.hotmail.com
Hi, Antoine
Thanks a lot!
My team now would like to use a more complete BPMN model while the
stp.bpmn seems not complete to BPMN2.0 specification. So we want add some
new elements that you did not add into the bpmn.gmfgen some new elements, so
is there any other way to achieve the goal of making a more complete BPMN
modeling tool if I don't touch those files?
Even if I am unware that the stp.bpmn project have finished all elements
specified in BPMN2.0, we also try to add some new elements into it so that
the new expanded model file generated by the modeling tool can accomplish
other tasks that our team have planed in the whole project of ourselves.
That's what I am doing.
I found that stp.bpmn project seems never changed those files since
developers come into the GMF2.0 age, because now they are still gmf1.0's
file. However, I found the gmf model file is indeed added some new elements,
which confused me.
Hope your help. Thanks!
Regards
Derry
>"Antoine Toulme" <atoulme@intalio.com>
> Hi Derry,
>
> those files are compatible with GMF 1.0, and the code they generate has
> been customized so much it would be best to not touch them.
>
> Let us know what you would like to do and we will point you to samples.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Antoine
>
|
|
|
| Re: Question:Does this developing environment suitable? [message #613885 is a reply to message #613883] |
Thu, 20 March 2008 03:22 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: atoulme.intalio.com
Hi Derry,
AFAIK the BPMN 2.0 specification is still at the RFP phase. That is why
we don't feel the need to support it.
There is currently an ongoing effort to provision a BPMN 2.0 semantic
model, as part of the MT project.
I would be interested to know what is missing in the editor right now
regarding that new specification.
The other way to extend the BPMN modeler is to get your own edit part
factory, and add more edit parts, as well as extending the view factory.
You will also need to customize the semantic edit policies to add
commands for the new element types that you introduce.
Thanks,
Antoine
Derry wrote:
> Hi, Antoine
> Thanks a lot!
> My team now would like to use a more complete BPMN model while the
> stp.bpmn seems not complete to BPMN2.0 specification. So we want add
> some new elements that you did not add into the bpmn.gmfgen some new
> elements, so is there any other way to achieve the goal of making a more
> complete BPMN modeling tool if I don't touch those files?
>
> Even if I am unware that the stp.bpmn project have finished all
> elements specified in BPMN2.0, we also try to add some new elements into
> it so that the new expanded model file generated by the modeling tool
> can accomplish other tasks that our team have planed in the whole
> project of ourselves. That's what I am doing.
> I found that stp.bpmn project seems never changed those files since
> developers come into the GMF2.0 age, because now they are still gmf1.0's
> file. However, I found the gmf model file is indeed added some new
> elements, which confused me.
> Hope your help. Thanks!
>
> Regards
> Derry
>
>> "Antoine Toulme" <atoulme@intalio.com>
>> Hi Derry,
>>
>> those files are compatible with GMF 1.0, and the code they generate has
>> been customized so much it would be best to not touch them.
>>
>> Let us know what you would like to do and we will point you to samples.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Antoine
>>
>
>
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.04412 seconds
Home