| 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.
Thanks, Adrian.
---------------
Adrian Mos ObjectWeb Project SOA Technical Lead
+33 4 76 61 54 02
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
|
