Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[jwt-dev] [jwt-users] and the road goes on...

Hi all,

I've been very busy during the last months but it's still interesting to give some more inputs to the guys designing and developping all the great stuffs ! ;)

I'm very pleased to say that JWT has great days coming. I'm working together with some people in a great european institution and it's getting more and more evident that a flexible tool as JWT plans to be is definitely awaited by the market. The need for a BPMN notation seems to be important for a few people. In fact what is important I think is to have the ability to use JWT as top-down tool as so as a bottom-up tool. What I mean by this is that when going towards SOA, the two different approachs are most of time considered. The top-down approachs considers going from BPM representation to a more technical view whereas the bottom-up approach is focusing on the technical aspects, eventually mutualising the services achieved and exposing them to a more high level view (typically the process view, the analyst view). Having the ability to use JWT as a simple technical tool for modeling a process and deploy it on a runtime is great but what is also interesting is to be able to start from a more business modeling view (typically BPMN) and then switch from this view to a more technical view. How this could be implemented is maybe to have different tabs on the editor exposing the same process in different views. Then comes the difficulty of mapping the different views as the representations may not perfectly suits from one another.

let me know of what you think about this.


On 2/27/07, Fabrice Dewasmes < fabrice.dewasmes@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Thanks Marc for the introduction. Users workgroup starts as of now ! ;)
I strongly invite every people involved in this group not to hesitate to comment anything I say and participate actively.


First of all, we shall clearly define the goal of this workgroup. In one of his previous emails, Marc spotted it as this : Gathers all user-oriented point of views and desideratas.

To my point of view the users workgroup should gather requirements from the community and committers and package this to be presented to the architecture workgroup so that they can evaluate feasibility and integrate the requirement in the roadmap. Our role is important as it will help JWT project go in the right direction and gain great community adoption.


We may use the wiki to expose the requirements that are gathered. But to capture community requirements maybe we should find a communication channel. I think we will definitely need a jwt-user mailing list.

Some starting ideas

- what could be interesting for the wam part is to be able to define a server model the same way WTP does and then define instances of that model. Then a dedicated view will show the servers declared and enable the user to start/stop them.
- Again for WAM, we should be able to deploy a process definition to a server model. Special deployment checks should occur to see if the process grammar matches the server capabilities. Then I think we should have a dedicated perspective where we could navigate in the servers, deployed packages, deployed processes. A right click on a process could enable to start one process either in run mode or debug mode. For both we shall be able to enter process variables values. The process graphical view shall enable to see the process instance state(for example by highlighting current state).
- For WE we should provide a simple user way to expose business services. I mean that most of the time there are existing services in the companies that they certainly wat to leverage and use in a process orchestration. A user shall be able to rapidly import services made available by the company so that the can be part of a process. The import shall be possible from several sources : UDDI, WSDL (file or URL), or more specific services that may depend on the infrastructure but that are generic (for example mail service). The imported services should be available in a front panel and could be dragged and dropped on the process graphical view

Those use cases shall be discussed and then refined. Your turn now !


Back to the top