John, I really like OpenWFE language but that's more for us guys! My customers would have not clue. They need to have a picture of what's going one (or might be going on). This is where BPMN comes in. A Picture is worth a 1000 words.
Pat. > From: John Mettraux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Reply-To: <[email protected]> > Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:46:12 +0900 > To: <[email protected]> > Subject: [openwferu-dev] Re: Converting BPMN graph to OpenWFERu > > > On 7/26/07, Pat Cappelaere <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> John, >> >> It is an intersting exercise... >> I am wondering if an automated code generator would not do something like >> this: >> >> >> class BookOrder < OpenWFE:ProcessDefinition >> >> sequence do >> customer activity=>'order' >> bookstore activity=>'handle order' >> >> bookstore activity=>'place book order' >> >> publisher activity=>'handle order' >> >> _if test => "${f:publisher_reply} == 'order confirmed'" do >> branch_1 >> end >> >> _if test => "${f:publisher_reply} == 'order rejected'" do >> branch_2 >> end >> >> subprocess name="branch_1" >> sequence do >> bookstore :activity => 'request shipment' >> shipper :activity=> 'handle shipment request' >> _if test => "${f:shipper_reply} == 'accept shipment'" do >> branch_3 >> end >> _if test => "${f:shipper_reply} == 'reject shipment'" do >> branch_4 >> end >> end >> end >> >> subprocess name="branch_2" >> sequence do >> bookstore activity=>"alternative publisher' >> branch_1 >> end >> end >> >> subprocess name="branch_3" >> sequence do >> bookstore activity=>'inform publisher' >> bookstore activity=>'send bill' >> customer activity=>'pay bill' >> bookstore activity=>'handle payment' >> end >> end >> >> subprocess name="branch_4" >> bookstore activity=>'alternative shipment' >> branch_3 >> end >> end > > Maybe. Why not ? It really depends on the implementation and it has to > be simple. > > I regret... BPMN is just a notation. I sincerely thinks that the > OpenWFE process definition language allows for more concise business > process and that it's easier to define/describe crappier business > processes in BPMN than in OpenWFE process definition language. But > that's not the point of this thread, excuse my digression. Where in > the 21st century and it's very seldom to write code in assembler > directly... But is BPMN higher level than OpenWFE process definition > language, I doubt it. > > Whatever the process definition language as long as the engine may run it. > > > Best regards, > > -- > John Mettraux -///- http://jmettraux.openwfe.org > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OpenWFEru dev" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/openwferu-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
