Agenda: Technical Committee Meeting, Tuesday, 11:00 to 17:30
Chair: Keith Swenson
Welcome and Introductions
Anti-trust and intellectual property statement
Approval of previous minutes
Addition of any other business to the agenda
Approval of the agenda
WG1-XPDL (Process Definition Interchange)
Status Update Briefing (Robert Shapiro)
Working Session on Enhancements Identified for XPDL v2.1
Conformance Criteria
Demonstration of Interchange Testing
Work and Activities: Status / Overview / Update
Industry Architecture & Standards Stack
Glossary update
Other standardization initiatives including
ISO status,
BPDM status.
Reference Model update
WG4 - Wf-XML (Run-time Interoperability)
OASIS ASAP status
Review of the latest Wf-XML document and status.
Future work & AOB
WG5 meeting (Audit)
Master list of events & Data Structure
Status of BPRI
Future work & AOB
Any other business
Educational Tutorial Series on XPDL-BPMN through webinars
(can be referred to joint meeting with ERC.)
May 21 Tutorial Details
WfMC Tutorial Day
Presentation format, each talk 45 minutes. We have a lot of material from the last tutorial, but a lot of redundancy. We need to remove the overlap between the presentations. The day has two main parts: the first four explain what workflow/BPM is, how it is used today and the near future, and establish the need for standards. The next four focus on the standards themselves. Previously we had a lot of compare and contrast which led to overlap. Within a presentation on a standard, there still will be some description of how they fit together, but each presentation will have a clear focus. The summary at the end recaps what was presented and then opens the floor for questions on any topic.
# BPM 101 - Michael zur Muehlen, 45 Minutes
This is the introductory presentation which Michael has given many times. The goal is to introduce the terms and concepts at a highlevel, and to motivate the entire rest of the presentation: why do you need workflow/bpm anyway?
# BPM and SOA Architecture - Keith Swenson, 45 Minutes
Specific terms and glossary. Talk about SOA, and the business / IT gap. Show the relationship between SOA and BPM, with different implementations over time. Show how the "who" and "when" is separate from the "how" and "what". Workflow reference model, and standards overview: one page on each standard and where it fits, and also the industry stack and timeline.
# Human BPM - Ken Mei and Justin Brunt, 45 Minutes
Introduces the different types of BPM: Human/Workflow and EAI Centric and discusses the charactistics of each. Then proceeds to compare them and discuss how they have converged into BPMS in recent times.
XPDL and BPMN was previously presented as a single 3 part presentation. However, for this seminar was split into separate presentations about the different standards. Introduced XPDL and its roots, its purpose, main characteristics, relqationship with BPMN and future directions.
# BPMN - Robert Shapiro, 45 Minutes
Discussed BPMN as a notation for describing business process. Provided an overview of the main constructts and their meanings as well as eacmples of processes defined in BPMN.
# BPEL - Ken Mei, 45 Minutes
Provided an overview of BPEL, what it is and what it isn't. Described the main constructs and their meanings. COmpared BPEL with XPDL.
# ASAP - Keith, 45 Minutes
# Summary/Q&A - Michael zur Muehlen, 30 minutes
Technical Meeting notes
BPDM Discussion
Conrad Bock from National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) who is working on the OMG TC for BPDM joined the discussion as a guest of the WfMC.
Anyone that uses BPMN to create process models for whatever purpose is welcome and encouraged to participate
Goal is for unification of orchestration and choreography. Kernel orchestration style and the external soa style models. Mapping to BPMN was high priority. Interested in having execution interoperability. No map to XPDL or CDL yet either. OMG processes don't really matter whether people or machine. Terms orchestration and choreography is used in BPDM. BPDM represent flows of information independent of the transport. Could be physical mail.
The BPMI merger with OMG caused BPMN to be a priority for it to be included as a transformation.
Boxes and arrows graphical are not included in BPDM, but later described that BPDM extension for BPMN is there, and group considers it a full file format for BPMN.
BPDM is in the process of an OMG wide vote. Oncethe vote is passed the specification is approved and goes into the FTF (Finalization Task Force) process.
Mega, Lombardi are amongst the most likely initial adopters. Other organizations are believed to be looking closely at the specification with a view to implementation.
An RFP is being drafted for the harmonization between BPMN and BPDM which will be known as BPMN 2.0.
Need to find a way of geting XPDL included inteh BPDM story. Perhaps through a joint working party.
Working Group 1 - XPDL Status
The group is continuing to work on XPDL 2.1. A number of changes recommended by implementers were started at the Santa Clara meeting in February. Work needs to continue to complete these topics. XPDL 2.1 also needs to pick up the changes that have been included BPMN 1.1 which is in its final stages of completion within OMG.
Ideally there should be consistency of graphical representations of the processes. Therefore, transformations should be about the center of the object. Additionally we would recommend web standard hex values for specifying color.
XPDL Interoperability
Fujitsu to FileNet
not sure how to read the results, looks like unable to recognize activities correctly. Probably FileNet is not motivated at this time.
Fujitsu to Global 360 (sketchpad)
process id issue (fixed)
page number of pool issue (Fujitsu to fix)
condition subtag expression is not being read correctly (G360 to fix)
Fujitsu to Global 360 (designer) -- failure to import (G360 to fix)
Fujitsu to TIBCO -- error on import (TIBCO to fix)
TIBCO to Fujitsu -- all processes read correctly.
TIBCO to Global 360 (sketchpad)
need new example with valid branch condition (TIBCO to fix)
pool graphics info needed, others, possibly transition path graphics needed (TIBCO to fix)
multiple tool ids, should all have same tool. Is this being used to encode some other information? (TIBCO to fix)
Global 360 to Fujitsu -- all processes read correctly.
Global 360 to TIBCO - error on import (TIBCO to fix)
Action: get the screenshots on the web site of the exchanges. We have this already for Fujitsu->FileNet.
Action: TIBCO to amend its examples to include real conditional information rather than just labels on the transitions.
Action: More examples are needed so each vendor should choose their favorite example and submit. The overall goal is to attempt execution in different engines.
Round tripping has not yet been tried between different engines to determine whether any extensions that the importing implmentation doesn't understand are preserved.
Industry Architecture and Architecture Stack
This has not been changed since the last meeting. Michael has a student working in this area who could possibly provide an update by the end of summer.
The Reference Model has not been worked on since the last meeting.
Action: Justin to set up meeting with Dave Hollingsworth to work on updating the Reference Model.
Working Group 4
OASIS suspended the ASAP Technical Committee as it did not complete the IP transfer process by the deadline.
Choices for further progress are:
#Start a new TC within OASIS and designate an appropriate IP policy to be adopted at start up of the TC. 6 members are required to start a TC. The specification appears to be in a good state and is ready for submission but it needs someone to shepherd it through the process which could take approximately 20% of someone's time for the duration of the process.
#WfMC to adopt the the specification and ratify it as its own specification. There will be different benefits depending on whether the specification is finalized through WfMC or OASIS.
#Stop using ASAP and adopt WS-Rsource Framework instead as an underlying mechanism for Wf-XML. This specification has support for resources but does not include support for starting activities.
Wf-XML specification requires more work before it is ready to be finalized so the overhead of using WS-Reousrce Framework instead may be large but does need investigation.
Action: Keith to investigate impact of adopting WS-Resource Framework and report back.
Working Group 5
No progress since the last meeting.
Michael met with Robert to discuss analytics but no progress on this to date.
At the last meeting we had a conference call/WebEx with representatives from the OMG BPRI TC (Petko Chobantonov and Derek Miers) but we concluded that this was not the best approach since it relied on cube support which isn't available in all products.
There is a need to look at requirements:
What applications do we want to feed with this data?
Messages in event stream need to be rich enough to cover all of the applications that would be expected to consume such events.
Some organizations have been looking at process discovery based in the event streams (e.g. Wil van der Aalst and Skip Ellis).
Michael proposed that and he and Robert start with a whitepaper to discuss the requirement and to target a conference to present it at.
There is a new RFP from OMG concerning processes in Financial Services. It has been drawn up by the Financial Domain Task Force. The RFI was issued in April 2006 (Finance 06-06-01 - Business Process RFI for Financial Services) Unisys has responded to this.
It looks like this is something that we should be aware but that the coalition doesnât need to be concerned with since it is aimed at the application level.
AOB
Tutorial â Justin felt that the split of XPDL & BPMN presentations didnât work as well as when joined together. Michael felt that it should include value of process interchange. The phone and charger analogy from Keith's presentation was good. The presentation needs a good introduction to set the context. It would also benefit from more realistic examples rather than using those out of the BPMN spec. We could then walk through scenarios to demonstrate different aspects of BPMN. It would be useful to also see the linkage between XPDL, Wf-XML, UDDI in one example. The objective is not to present the specification and have people to leave presentation able to design processes using BPMN straight away. Robert will take a first pass at generating this.
Action: Robert to take a first pass at reworking the BPMN-XPDL presentation.
Action: TIBCO to take create all examples from BPMN 1.0 specification and submit screenshots and XPDL.
Open Source BPMN modelling tools. Perhaps WfMC should state that it supports this initiative. Not known whether any open source offerings that support XPDL 2 are available.
XPDL 2.1 proposed extensions - Shane Gabie from Unisys suggested some extensions for XPDL 2.1
Extend properties related to simulation to better define the costs related to simulation that activity. Want to be able to put actual costs back into process definition so that can use for comparison with simulated/expected costs.
Action: Shane Gabie will write up his proposals and submit them for consideration
Tom Laverty� proposed meeting to close and Justin Brunt seconded the proposal at 13:50
M�nchen �slo Bj�rn
Last edited by Keith Swenson 12/13/2008(Effective date 12/13/2008)
You are viewing a static copy of
a project that was originally a wiki.
These pages can not be modified
at this location even though the page
may appear incomplete.
This copy was generated on
01/29/2012
and this project information has not been
changed since 12/13/2008.
WfMC Meeting, May 22, 2007
Agenda: Technical Committee Meeting, Tuesday, 11:00 to 17:30
Chair: Keith Swenson
WG1-XPDL (Process Definition Interchange)
Work and Activities: Status / Overview / Update
WG4 - Wf-XML (Run-time Interoperability)
WG5 meeting (Audit)
Any other business
May 21 Tutorial Details
WfMC Tutorial Day
Presentation format, each talk 45 minutes. We have a lot of material from the last tutorial, but a lot of redundancy. We need to remove the overlap between the presentations. The day has two main parts: the first four explain what workflow/BPM is, how it is used today and the near future, and establish the need for standards. The next four focus on the standards themselves. Previously we had a lot of compare and contrast which led to overlap. Within a presentation on a standard, there still will be some description of how they fit together, but each presentation will have a clear focus. The summary at the end recaps what was presented and then opens the floor for questions on any topic.
# BPM 101 - Michael zur Muehlen, 45 Minutes
# BPM and SOA Architecture - Keith Swenson, 45 Minutes
# Human BPM - Ken Mei and Justin Brunt, 45 Minutes
# Analytics - Robert Shapiro, 45 Minutes # XPDL - Justin Brunt, 45 Minutes
# BPMN - Robert Shapiro, 45 Minutes
# BPEL - Ken Mei, 45 Minutes
# ASAP - Keith, 45 Minutes # Summary/Q&A - Michael zur Muehlen, 30 minutes
Technical Meeting notes
BPDM Discussion
Conrad Bock from National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) who is working on the OMG TC for BPDM joined the discussion as a guest of the WfMC.
Anyone that uses BPMN to create process models for whatever purpose is welcome and encouraged to participate
Goal is for unification of orchestration and choreography. Kernel orchestration style and the external soa style models. Mapping to BPMN was high priority. Interested in having execution interoperability. No map to XPDL or CDL yet either. OMG processes don't really matter whether people or machine. Terms orchestration and choreography is used in BPDM. BPDM represent flows of information independent of the transport. Could be physical mail.
The BPMI merger with OMG caused BPMN to be a priority for it to be included as a transformation.
Boxes and arrows graphical are not included in BPDM, but later described that BPDM extension for BPMN is there, and group considers it a full file format for BPMN.
BPDM is in the process of an OMG wide vote. Oncethe vote is passed the specification is approved and goes into the FTF (Finalization Task Force) process.
Mega, Lombardi are amongst the most likely initial adopters. Other organizations are believed to be looking closely at the specification with a view to implementation.
An RFP is being drafted for the harmonization between BPMN and BPDM which will be known as BPMN 2.0.
Need to find a way of geting XPDL included inteh BPDM story. Perhaps through a joint working party.
Working Group 1 - XPDL Status
The group is continuing to work on XPDL 2.1. A number of changes recommended by implementers were started at the Santa Clara meeting in February. Work needs to continue to complete these topics. XPDL 2.1 also needs to pick up the changes that have been included BPMN 1.1 which is in its final stages of completion within OMG.
Ideally there should be consistency of graphical representations of the processes. Therefore, transformations should be about the center of the object. Additionally we would recommend web standard hex values for specifying color.
XPDL Interoperability
Action: get the screenshots on the web site of the exchanges. We have this already for Fujitsu->FileNet.
Action: TIBCO to amend its examples to include real conditional information rather than just labels on the transitions.
Action: More examples are needed so each vendor should choose their favorite example and submit. The overall goal is to attempt execution in different engines.
Round tripping has not yet been tried between different engines to determine whether any extensions that the importing implmentation doesn't understand are preserved.
Industry Architecture and Architecture Stack
This has not been changed since the last meeting. Michael has a student working in this area who could possibly provide an update by the end of summer.
The Reference Model has not been worked on since the last meeting.
Action: Justin to set up meeting with Dave Hollingsworth to work on updating the Reference Model.
Working Group 4
OASIS suspended the ASAP Technical Committee as it did not complete the IP transfer process by the deadline.
Choices for further progress are: #Start a new TC within OASIS and designate an appropriate IP policy to be adopted at start up of the TC. 6 members are required to start a TC. The specification appears to be in a good state and is ready for submission but it needs someone to shepherd it through the process which could take approximately 20% of someone's time for the duration of the process. #WfMC to adopt the the specification and ratify it as its own specification. There will be different benefits depending on whether the specification is finalized through WfMC or OASIS. #Stop using ASAP and adopt WS-Rsource Framework instead as an underlying mechanism for Wf-XML. This specification has support for resources but does not include support for starting activities. Wf-XML specification requires more work before it is ready to be finalized so the overhead of using WS-Reousrce Framework instead may be large but does need investigation.
Action: Keith to investigate impact of adopting WS-Resource Framework and report back.
Working Group 5
No progress since the last meeting.
Michael met with Robert to discuss analytics but no progress on this to date.
At the last meeting we had a conference call/WebEx with representatives from the OMG BPRI TC (Petko Chobantonov and Derek Miers) but we concluded that this was not the best approach since it relied on cube support which isn't available in all products.
There is a need to look at requirements:
Some organizations have been looking at process discovery based in the event streams (e.g. Wil van der Aalst and Skip Ellis).
Michael proposed that and he and Robert start with a whitepaper to discuss the requirement and to target a conference to present it at.
There is a new RFP from OMG concerning processes in Financial Services. It has been drawn up by the Financial Domain Task Force. The RFI was issued in April 2006 (Finance 06-06-01 - Business Process RFI for Financial Services) Unisys has responded to this.
It looks like this is something that we should be aware but that the coalition doesnât need to be concerned with since it is aimed at the application level.
AOB
Action: Robert to take a first pass at reworking the BPMN-XPDL presentation.
Action: TIBCO to take create all examples from BPMN 1.0 specification and submit screenshots and XPDL.
Action: Shane Gabie will write up his proposals and submit them for consideration
Tom Laverty� proposed meeting to close and Justin Brunt seconded the proposal at 13:50
M�nchen �slo Bj�rn