i have some questions on the topic BPMN. They are true/false questions and im not sure how to answer them:
BPMN diagrams can generally not be executed (i think this is true)
BPMN diagrams are specific tasks (no idea on that one...)
can anyone help?
Thanks :)
BPMN diagrams can be executed by a workflow engine(Process Execution Engine).
BPMN diagrams consists of a group of tasks. Each task can be for example a script task or a user task or a call to an API task etc. Also a BPMN diagram can be a part of an other BPMN diagram by declaring it as a subprocess task.
For example, if we have a BPMN diagram which describes the order process of an item, we may have 3 different tasks in it.
Submit the order of the item
Pay for the item
Deliver item to customer
Related
Does anyone know if there is a free online tool available to create BPMN files except bpmn.io?
I have been using BPMN io for a while, and it does not allow me to change the task/event's ID from the GUI. Because of this, I have to do this manually. But it's not practical when there is a large number of events/tasks. Can someone tell me if there is a free online alternative for bpmn.io that can change the event's ID or if there is a way to change the id in bpmn.io? Did a background check on this and couldn't find one.
There is also the offering from Camunda - Camunda Web Modeler (CaWeMo). I don't think it does what you are asking though. I didn't think event IDs were part of the BPMN specification, since they are likely more about implementation than modeling, but I've not actually looked into the BPMN specification that deeply.
If the one you are using exports in a format that you find useful, you could update the event nodes as a post processing step.
You can try using https://kiegroup.github.io/kogito-online/#/editor/bpmn for bpmn authoring.
I'm using BPMN2.0 meta-model to represent process models. I cannot find any attributes to keep execution historic. I'm wondering if actually BPMN 2.0 does not support that, or if something escapes me?
In other words, my question is: is it possible to represent execution historic with BPMN 2.0 meta-model? if yes, how?
Thank you for your help.
BPMN supports the Elements Auditing and Monitoring. They are meant to be hooks for auditing and monitoring related properties. For the definition of such properties the extensibility mechanism is to be used. Actual definitions are out of the scope of the specification. So, the answer is, that BPMN supports this, but leaves the details to the user or the tool vendors.
I'm struggling with assigning the responsibilities in BPMN. In the process I'm designing, I have a task that can have different performers, depending on the instance details (software, hardware...).
Should I use an exclusive gateway and copy the task with different responsibles or is there an other way to make clear that there can be different responsibles?
In BPMN, you can't graphically model that multiple roles are responsible for one task. The reason behind this is simple; if the distinction between the roles is important enough to be graphically modeled, shouldn't you also model the condition that determines which role takes over the task, as well as the difference between the tasks?
The model below does this for a simplified IT support process:
On the other hand, you could argue that the difference between tasks and roles is not important enough to justify the added complexity in the graphical model:
Then, you could specify the distinction in the textual description of the task and/or in the configuration of the task in the execution environment (e.g. BPX engine).
You could also use a sub process element to 'hide' the details in a child process.
Note that some BPMN modeling software providers use vendor-specific BPMN extension elements (like Signavio's additional participant element) for modeling multi-participant task execution. However, these elements are typically useful in more complex responsibility assignment scenarios and not in the simple scenario we discuss here.
I'm working on Software Test Plan Document and I'm confused about diagram that I should use when making white-box testing. What's the difference between activity diagram and control flow graph? And which one should I use?
An activity diagram represents the behaviour of your system. The actions which the user can make or the system can make are linked with a, control or b, data flow.
The control flow diagram contains the progam logic with weights and guard conditions.
In a software Test Plan I would suggest first to use an activity diagramm to get the general overview. To express explicit logic, you can have an additional control flow diagram.
This depends on you system under test, and you have to chose the right diagram depending what kind of SUT you have. Normally you need several diagrams to give light on different aspects.
I'm not sure if this is the right place to ask this question but here goes.
I'm currently looking into some different techniques to model a business proces. I need to find a suitable option for my company which develops all kind of web applications.
What i have found so far:
UML, specificly the activity diagrams
Flow charts
Windows workflow foundation
Business process modeling
I had a dive into the world of workflows but it's mainly about automating a process of a company and thats not what I'm looking for. My focus is on software and the process within.
If anyone else knows some other technique or can tell me the advantages or disadvanteges of the techniques I allready found that would be much appreciated because I'm a little stuck right now.
Right now BPMN (Business Process Modeling Notation) and UML activity diagrams are the two most popular options for that.
I think of BPMN as the right choice when you are modeling the business aspects of the organization and move to Activity Diagrams as soon as you drill down to the technical design of the software system (as a core component of the UML language, activity diagrams are a better fit when having to combine workflow information with other views of the system, expressed also as UML diagrams like class diagrams or sequence diagrams).
Note that now a UML profile for BPMN is being created which means that you will be able to mix BPMN and UML diagrams in the same project
I suggest you consider ISO/IEC 24744. It will give you a very different perspective, since it does not use the ubiquitous "organisation as machine" metaphor, going for a more opportunistic, people-oriented viewpoint.
In other words, ISO/IEC 24744 does not represent a business process as a workflow where the process to follow is the driver. Instead, a business process is represented through the work products that are involved and the people that act upon them. The process performed plays an important but secondary role.
If you are interested in why this is so, or what the advantages are, let me know and I'll be happy to elaborate.
I think you are asking about transforming your business requirements/rules into technical requirements and then into a design? After that you will implement this design into code.
Am not sure if this is what you are asking about..