[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [mdt-bpmn2.dev] BPMN 2.0 spec inconsistency?
- From: Gary Brown <gbrown@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2013 07:29:29 -0500 (EST)
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
Table 9.8 says that "The InteractionNode that the Message Flow is connecting from. Of
the types of InteractionNode, only Pools/Participants, Activities, and
Events can be the source of a Message Flow." (effectively the same for target).
Sub-process is an activity, therefore this should be supported. The xml schema for MessageFlow uses QName for source and target ref, so essentially untyped.
----- Original Message -----
> Hello devs,
> I've been asked to look into what may be an inconsistency in the BPMN
> 2.0 specification. It was first discovered by a user, and reported
> as a bug in the eclipse BPMN2 Modeler here 
> According to the BPMN 2.0 spec, it appears as though a SubProcess MAY
> be the source or target of a MessageFlow but looking at the class
> diagram for MessageFlow, only InteractionNodes may be sources and
> targets and SubProcess clearly does not implement InteractionNode.
> Is this a bug? If so, does the problem lie within the spec, the
> bpmn2 metamodel or both?
>  https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=398065
> Robert ("Bob") Brodt
> Senior Software Engineer
> JBoss by Red Hat