Please see my comments in-line.

Anne Thomas Manes wrote:
> +1 Steve.
>
> Ashraf -- I don't think I could disagree with you more.
> While I think BPM and SOA ( or more precisely, process orientation and
> service orientation) are complementary, a good architect always
> recognizes that all "orientation" mindsets must be used appropriately.
> And you should also recognize that these mindsets are based on
> analysis and design principles--not on technologies. 

> BPEL is
> irrelevant to both BPM and SOA. 
How come?!!

*BPMN enables us to draw the representation of a business process, which 
is then mapped into the executable BPEL code, and executed directly on 
the SOA platform.
*

*SOA is about business content, business processes, aligning IT with the 
business, and optimizing the business processes.*

Please correct me if i am wrong.
**
> As Steve says, you may decide to
> implement a service using BPEL, but you could just as easily do so
> using Java, C#, Ruby, or Erlang. Techology selection is a
> project-specific decision that occurs very late in a BPM project.
>   
I am sorry I disagree with you.
This is a technology point of view. Not from the enterprise point of view.
How the Java or other languages can support the human interaction, as 
for example, if we build a business process ?
Please notice that these languages is low-level compared to business 
processes.

Therefore, we sometimes refer to them as ‘*programming-in-the-small’*.

*SOA approach to development is sometimes called 
/programming-in-the-large.  /*

Composition of services (using BPEL) has been designed for such a purpose.

> Key "technologies" that support BPM include Six Sigma and Lean
> methodologies, swim lanes, process maps, ARIS, Visio, etc. These are
>   
> the tools business people use to analyze existing processes and
> explore/simulate new ways to accomplish their work and achieve their
> desired business outcomes. Some aspects of their proceses can be
> automated. Others can't. Some aspects of achieving business outcomes
> are delivered via better insight -- not through processes. (in which
> case adopting a purely process-centric perspective is detrimental)
If you speak about flowcharts, it is ok.
But business needs more than that, business want to reduce the IT gap time.
> After analyzing their processes, business people submit requests to IT
> to implement application software to automate certain aspects of the
> process. IT people then use a variety of modeling notations to design
> solutions, e.g., BPMN or UML. From there, they write/produce code.
> Some people attempt to generate code from their models. I have yet to
> find anyone who supports that code who still believes in the
> model/code roundtripping myth.
>   
I can tell that I reversed engineering Java code when I joined a project 
at its end stage on 2004, to understand the project and to finalize it 
and deliver it to their end user.
It takes a few weeks and lot of efforts but without that it would take a 
months.
I modified some of the model and forward engineer it to code again, and 
with little support from the developers, we achieved our goals.
I do believe in model/code roundtripping myth and I think there are some 
believe on it too.
It is not just a theory, but we have to open our minds up to new 
concepts, study them without precluding anything, then we can select the 
best fits us.
I think I learned that from you Anne.

All the best
Ashraf Galal

> Anne
>
>
>
> On Sunday, December 13, 2009, Steve Jones <[email protected]> wrote:
>   
>> Lets plan planet fail....
>>
>> 2009/12/13 Ashraf Galal <[email protected]>:
>>     
>>> The key technology of SOA is BPEL.
>>>       
>> #FAIL
>>
>> Even if we say that SOA is a technology thing its really rather hard
>> to say that a PROCESS language is THE key technology of SERVICE
>> orientation.  Its like saying that procedures are the key technology
>> of OO.
>>
>>     
>>> This language minimizes the semantic gap between the process model and
>>> the actual execution code.
>>>       
>> I might let you have this one, its not right (it can reduce it a bit
>> in certain cases rather than being a blanket statement)
>>
>>     
>>> BPEL enables business processes to be executed directly.
>>>       
>> #FAIL
>>
>> See "Christmas SOA" which explains why what you execute is rarely what
>> the business process is, this is the difference between the perceived
>> process and the executed process.  BPEL works at the executed level.
>>
>>     
>>> Process models, preferably developed in BPMN, can manually,
>>> semi-automatically, or automatically be translated into BPEL.
>>>       
>> Not a fail but....
>>
>> BPMN can also be translated into Java, C, assembler or many other
>> languages.  Now its _sometimes_ easier to do it into BPEL but that
>> doesn't mean
>>
>> Also "manually" translated means there are significant gaps.
>>
>>     
>>> With BPEL, various activities, called partner links, are performed by
>>> services.
>>>       
>> I really think we all know this stuff.  Are you Scott Nudds?
>>
>>
>>     
>>> Therefore, an important aspect is the decomposition of the business
>>> process and its mapping to the services.
>>>
>>> Services are the central artifacts of SOA architecture. We use services
>>> to model automated business activities or human tasks.
>>>       
>> #FAIL
>>
>> Nope, the CAPABILITIES model the activities or tasks, the SERVICES
>> provide the mechanism for accessing those capabilities.
>>
>>     
>>> SOA enables much tighter integration between business processes and
>>> software architecture. Many tools on the market today provide
>>> bidirectional lifecycle support.
>>>
>>> This means that changes made to the model (BPMN) are automatically
>>> propagated to implementation (BPEL), and vice versa.
>>>       
>> #FAIL
>>
>> Ever worked on a project that used these things?  You export from BPMN
>> then you have to tweak the BPEL and from that point onwards the
>> roundtrip is almost always doomed.
>>
>>
>>     
>>> If we do not use SOA and Services we will end up with a lot of problems
>>> because BPMN is designed specifically for SOA.
>>>
>>> There is nothing perfect, but we have to set up our goals and work to
>>> achieve them.
>>>
>>> Also we have to recognize that SOA changes the traditional development
>>> life cycle. instead of analysis, design, implementation and testing, we
>>> will have business process modeling using BPMN, composition, testing and
>>> monitoring.
>>> SOA changes our life and people do not accept change easily.
>>>       
>> #FAIL
>>
>> What you are talking about is _not_ change its simple the old school
>> of "technologies first" implementation which also assumes some form of
>> mystical technology stack which has a vendors current hot ticket item
>> at the top.  In your case you see it as BPEL/BPMN but others would
>> look at CEP as being another option for that top stack.
>>
>> The key piece of SOA is thinking about the services FIRST and then
>> thinking about which of the capabilities of those services are BEST
>> delivered using processes and which are BEST delivered in other ways.
>>
>> In this way you look at the business first and don't assume the technologies.
>>
>>
>>     
>>> All the best
>>>
>>>       
>> Planet #FAIL population:
>>
>>     
>>> Ashraf Galal
>>>       
>> Cheers
>>
>> Steve
>>
>>     
>>>
>>>
>>> cordau wrote:
>>>       
>>>> Ashraf,
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>>> With these two technologies, plus some additional ones, SOA provides:
>>>>>
>>>>> - A language—BPEL—for direct execution of business processes
>>>>>
>>>>> - Round-trip mapping between the process models in BPMN, and their
>>>>> executable representation in BPEL
>>>>>
>>>>> With this, SOA considerably reduces the semantic gap between the
>>>>> business processes and application systems.
>>>>>
>>>>> BPMN enables us to draw the representation of a business process, which
>>>>> is then mapped into the executable BPEL code, and executed directly on
>>>>> the SOA platform.
>>>>>           
>>>> You should know that not all BPMN processes are mappable to standard
>>>> BPEL (let alone being able to roundtrip). See
>>>> http://www.brsilver.com/wordpress/2009/11/19/bpmn-vs-bpel-are-we-still-debating-this/
>>>> <http://www.brsilver.com/wordpress/2009/11/19/bpmn-vs-bpel-are-we-still-debating-this/>
>>>> for details.
>>>>
>>>> Active Endpoints, a BPMN and BPEL tools vendor, had to introduce a
>>>> proprietary extension to BPEL in order to support some BPMN processes.
>>>> See
>>>> http://www.activevos.com/indepth/f_technicalNotes/aa_ExtendingBPEL/ExtendingBPELWithLoopingTransitions.pdf.
>>>> <http://www.activevos.com/indepth/f_technicalNotes/aa_ExtendingBPEL/ExtendingBPELWithLoopingTransitions.pdf.>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>   



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/service-orientated-architecture/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply via email to