|Re: BPMN & bpel integration [message #1604]
||Wed, 11 June 2008 09:03
| Stephane Drapeau
Registered: July 2009
I agree with you Antoine. BPMN and SCA address two different things. As
you said BPMN is about drawing business processes. SCA is a programming
model that allows you to describe component-based applications. You can
compose existing or not existing functions into new solutions. To
summarize, SCA specifications allow to design applications with the
- Dissociate applications from details of its invoked service calls.
- Target services in a multitude of languages: Java, C++, BPEL, PHP, ...
- Work with various communication constructs: one-way, asynchronous,
- Bind to legacy components or services accessed via Web Services, EJB,
JMS, RMI, ...
- Declare outside requirements about quality of service : security,
- ... have a look at the SCA specifications ;)
Concerning the SCA Composite Designer, currently, you can only
drag'n'drop Java files or SCA assembly files on components to set the
component implementations. Then you can right clic on the implementation
icon to open the file with the Java editor or the SCA designer.
We plan to propose some extension points allowing to drag'n'drop
different kinds of implementation(for instance BPEL)/interface/binding
and to open the file by right clic with the appropriate editor (for
instance the BPEL designer).
Antoine Toulme a écrit :
> I don't know about that. The SCA editor devs should know more.
> BPMN and SCA are not competing, they serve different approachs. SCA is
> meant to help define services while BPMN is just about drawing business
> processes. There is no inherent executable nature behind BPMN processes.
> Of course if you use them for defining interfaces between services then
> they tend to be pretty equivalent.
> That said, I didn't try the SCA editor (yet), so I might be wrong.
> ymo wrote:
>> Is it possible to extend (dnd, editors, etc ... ) the SCA editor in
>> the same way ?
>> correction of the previous question
Powered by FUDForum
. Page generated in 0.01782 seconds