Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
Re: [] ItemDefinition and structureRef

Hi Bob,
I'm still convinced that a reference to EObject is correct. In the XSD model of BPMN2 it is a QName, which is a clear sign that they expect a kind of valid reference to something (whatever something means). It could be a reference to an XSD complex type or Element. But it could also be a reference to any proprietary Data structure containing any kind of information. 
For the EMF model it means that it could point to an EObject from a private class, e.g. containing some strings. 
We had a similar discussion on the list some time ago. See here:
There is even an example, how you could but a string into the structureRef property using the EOject proxyURI.


-----Urspr√ľngliche Nachricht-----
Von: [] Im Auftrag von Bob Brodt
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 13. Oktober 2011 23:23
Cc: adrian mos; Antoine Toulme
Betreff: [] ItemDefinition and structureRef

Hi all,

I'm running across some problems with the bpmn2 metamodel when trying to reference informational items with an ItemDefinition. This is related to

The main issue is that structureRef is a reference to an EObject; as I understand it, for itemKind=INFORMATION the structureRef doesn't necessarily refer to any kind of data structure, nor EObject - it could be a plain String object. At some point in its history, this feature was a QName (see the links in to discussions about why this was changed) but it's been changed to EObject Reference.

Since interpretation of this feature is mostly up to the runtime anyway, does anyone see a problem with making this an Object instead of a EObject reference?

Also, the BPMN 2.0 spec states that the default value for itemKind is INFORMATION, but the model has the default as PHYSICAL - but that's a minor issue.

Robert ("Bob") Brodt
Senior Software Engineer
JBoss by Red Hat

_______________________________________________ mailing list

Back to the top