Hello
Florian, all,
Thanks
a lot for your welcome! Im excited for the chance to work with you all and of
course, Id be happy to collaborate with your group at the
University!
To
begin, I will be studying the existing BPMN to STP-IM which has been implemented
using the EMF generated Java APIs of both metamodels, in order to understand it
better and then implement the STP-IM to SCA transformation with Adrian. The
short term goal is to enable to user to model a business process and obtain the
architecture model of a composite application supporting this process. I will
try to document these conceptual mappings in the wiki as much as I can and let
you know ;)
About
the transformation mechanism, the EMF generated APIs is the most flexible and
straightforward option for us developers, however itd be nice to have the
transformation rules separate from other concerns such as reading/persisting
models, accessing annotations etc., and also have them comply with OMGs QVT
standard. As such, using ATL would make a better choice in the long run,
although we have to evaluate how this would work inside STP. The only thing Im
not sure at the moment is about the best way to launch ATL transformations
programmatically, whether invoking Ant scripts or using the ATL APIs. Does
anyone have a final word on this?
Also,
I have created a page describing the current STP-IM plug-in structure as it
stands today in the SVN repository, for all of us to benefit [1]. I hope you can
take a look and provide the necessary edits! Thanks a lot!
-Juan
[1]
http://wiki.eclipse.org/STP/IM_Component/Plug-in_Structure
From: Florian
Lautenbacher [mailto:florian.lautenbacher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:03 AM
To: 'Java Workflow
Toolbox'; 'Andrea Zoppello'
Cc: 'Juan Cadavid'; 'Marius
Brendle'
Subject: AW: AW: [jwt-dev] Re: STP/IM
questions/help
Hi
Adrian, hi Andrea,
thanks
for your support in our questions. I can understand that you are only
integrating new concepts into STP-IM in a few months, but this makes it of
course hard for us at the moment to decide which concepts to use for the
transformations. So, we are unsure whether we simply introduce new concepts for
the moment in our copy of the STP-IM (to cover the workflow aspects) and
contribute them within a bug to the development of STP-IM or whether we simply
stay with its current layout (where it is sometimes difficult to identify all
concepts we need). Probably, we will only implement a short subset for the
moment and when the STP-IM has been polished, then we include the remaining
parts.
Thanks
for changing Transition to a Configurable element and also thanks for your
assistance with Conditions, Owner, Service and the
ecore_diagram-file.
And, of
course: hello to Juan Cadavid who will work on transformation starting with
STP-IM and going somewhere else ;-) What exactly is the focus of the first
transformation? BPEL? SCA? BPMN? How are these transformations done? Using ATL,
QVT? Maybe Juan and our group here at the University could benefit by asking
questions concerning the transformations to each other!?
Till
next Friday all conceptual work will be finished, so we will have decided then
which concepts from JWT will be transformed into what concept in STP-IM and
after that the implementation will start (most probably using ATL). Here my
students will have a look on the already implemented JWT to BPMN transformations
by Stéphane and will implement their transformations in a similar
way.
I will
keep you updated as soon as we got some news.
Best
regards,
Florian
Von:
jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag
von Adrian Mos
Gesendet: 06 May 2008 12:35
An: Java
Workflow Toolbox; Andrea Zoppello
Cc: Juan Cadavid; Marius
Brendle
Betreff: Re: AW: [jwt-dev] Re: STP/IM
questions/help
Hi Guys,
Sorry for the late reply, I've been away until this
morning.
First of all it's great to see that you guys are working on
this, and it's only natural that questions arise. As you have guessed it, the IM
is not yet completely polished and it's also trough feedback like this that we
can improve it. I also want to take the opportunity to introduce to you Juan
Cadavid (in CC) who will work on BPMN/BPEL/SCA/etc :) transformations using the
STP-IM. He has recently been awarded an internship scholarship through the
Google Summer of Code to work on this. Juan, perhaps it would be a good idea to
subscribe to the jwt mailing lists so that you can follow this relationship
between JWT and STP-IM more closely.
As Andrea said, the Owner and Service Classification have
been introduced with the concept of UDDI in mind and I also think it's probably
best we don't use them for workflow modelling, unless of course you have a
strong need for them, in which case we can try and come up with the best
solution to this.
Andrea has already made the change to make the Transition a
configurable element, please let us know if this helps and what other problems
you encounter with the transformations. It would also be great if you could keep
us updated with the progress of this in general so that we can follow up with
suggestions and so on.
INRIA
Rhone-Alpes
655
avenue de l'Europe - Montbonnot
38
334 Saint Ismier Cedex France
On May 6, 2008, at 9:13 AM, Andrea Zoppello
wrote:
Hi Florian,
See the comments inline
1) Owner
and Service Classification were not introduced with the concept of workflow in
"mind", but were
introduced to support in future the concept of "service
registries like uddi", so in my opinion it's better you don't use these
two
entities for modeling workflow scenario.
My suggestion is not to use these
two entities for modeling workflow enitities in IM
BTW in the next month,
we're going to exactly introcude workflow concept like role, "Human Based Step"
on IM beacuse we need them
Unfortunately, now i'm quite busy and i've not so
much time to do that.
Basically my idea is to introduce a sub class of
step ( RoleBasedStep ) to model workflow activities
2) If you take the
code from sv you could look at the emf model in graphical way
looking at the
stpmodel.ecore_diagram file
3) If you look at the diagran you could
find that a TransitionUnderCondition is a Transition with a Condition entity
associated where
a condition could be A PropertyCondition ( subclass of
Condition ) or an _expression_ Condition ( subclass of condition ) where you could
find
an _expression_ language attribute.
4) At the moment Transition are
not "ConfigurableElement" but i think i'm going to change this this today so
Transition will
be ConfigurationElement.
Hope this
help.
Andrea Zoppello
Florian Lautenbacher ha
scritto:
Hi Andrea,
thanks for your fast reply. Since we want to have a mature
transformation,
it is difficult for us to build on something that might be
removed or might
be created in the future :-)
So I guess we will currently focus on Owner and
ServiceClassification
without considering that those might be subject of change
in the future. You
said that TransitionUnderCondition is used for a BPMN
Exclusive Gateway?
Where exactly do you specify the condition then? Is this a
property of the
TransitionUnderCondition (as a Configurable Element)? Is
there a way to
specify which (_expression_) language this condition is based
on?
Mostly we are using the .ecore-file from the SVN, but
sometimes its easier
to view it graphically in the
wiki...
Thanks for your assistance and best
regards,
Florian
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
Im
Auftrag von Andrea Zoppello
Gesendet: 05 May 2008 17:06
An: Marius Brendle
Cc: jwt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
Betreff: [jwt-dev] Re: STP/IM
questions/help
Hi,
1) Owner and ServiceClassification are really not used at
the moment, and i
think we're going to think and define well in future when
we're going to
approach to model workflow scenarios in
IntermediateModel.
My personal idea is to add a Role entity and to have a
subclass of "Step"
called "RoleAssignedStep" or something similar that will
define that a
particular step will be assigned and will be performed by a
specific role
2) A "TransitionUnderCondition" must be used when the
transition is
conditioned to some rule to happen ( we use this ) for
exampleto model the
transition outcoming from a bpmn exclusive
gateway.
3) We choose all the entity to be subclass of configurable
element, so each
element could have properties.
Maybe the wiki documentation is a little out of date, btw
the version used
is the one you could find in the svn
repository.
Hope this helps.
Andrea Zoppello
Marius Brendle ha scritto:
Hello Andrea &
Adrian,
we're working on a project of Florian Lauterbacher at the
University in Augsburg (Germany). Our goal is to do a model transformation
of the JWT (AgilPro) meta-model to the STP Intermediate
Model.
Even in the recent SVN snapshot, there are several model
elements
(classes) like Owner, ServiceClassification,
TransitionUnderCondition and ObservableAttrible without any attributes!
Could it be possible that the STP/IM is incomplete until now at this point?
Or is this a wanted design decision by you? Or should we do some decisions
by ourselves? Perhaps all the above mentioned classes are also of the type
"ConfigurableElement" (so addional properties could be added), but this is
not the case in the model or the Wiki at this
point!
How will the "ControlServices" be handled? In the Wiki
there is mentioned that this is not completed till
now...
Thank you for the help in
advice!
Kind regards,
Christian, Stephan and
Marius
--
*Andrea
Zoppello*
___________________________________________
<www.spagoworld.org>
Spagic
Architect
___________________________________________
Architect
Research
& Innovation Division
*Engineering Ingegneria Informatica
S.p.A.
*
Corso Stati Uniti, 23/C - 35127 Padova - Italy
Phone:
+39-049.8692511 Fax:+39-049.8692566
*www.eng.it
www.spagoworld.org*
_______________________________________________
jwt-dev
mailing list
jwt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jwt-dev
