Comments on: BPM Think Tank Day 2: BPEL Roundtable http://www.column2.com/2007/08/bpm-think-tank-day-2-bpel-roundtable/ BPM, Enterprise 2.0 and technology trends in business. Fri, 20 Jan 2012 09:15:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Sandy Kemsley http://www.column2.com/2007/08/bpm-think-tank-day-2-bpel-roundtable/comment-page-1/#comment-5559 Sandy Kemsley Wed, 08 Aug 2007 21:59:15 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2007/08/bpm-think-tank-day-2-bpel-roundtable/#comment-5559 Fabian, what I heard from the BPEL experts around the table -- primarily Ismael and someone from Oracle -- is that the original white paper (probably not truly a specification) from 2005 had human interaction modelled as web service calls such that BPEL didn't require any extensions, whereas the current specification extends BPEL to include the human-facing task support. I haven't read either specification, but that's my understanding. Gabriel, I agree that BPMN is the way to go for modelling processes; I don't think that it's anyone's intention that you write (or even see) naked BPEL. The only sticking point is that BPEL still doesn't support the full BPMN standard. Fabian, what I heard from the BPEL experts around the table — primarily Ismael and someone from Oracle — is that the original white paper (probably not truly a specification) from 2005 had human interaction modelled as web service calls such that BPEL didn’t require any extensions, whereas the current specification extends BPEL to include the human-facing task support. I haven’t read either specification, but that’s my understanding.

Gabriel, I agree that BPMN is the way to go for modelling processes; I don’t think that it’s anyone’s intention that you write (or even see) naked BPEL. The only sticking point is that BPEL still doesn’t support the full BPMN standard.

]]> By: Gabriel Gejman http://www.column2.com/2007/08/bpm-think-tank-day-2-bpel-roundtable/comment-page-1/#comment-5535 Gabriel Gejman Fri, 03 Aug 2007 18:04:22 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2007/08/bpm-think-tank-day-2-bpel-roundtable/#comment-5535 I, as a business process analyst, appreciate the BPMS that don't show me the "code". I think BPEL is difficult to understand to business people and BPMN is there for us. A BPMS that can translate BPMN (or BPDM) to his execution language (what ever it is) is better for me. I, as a business process analyst, appreciate the BPMS that don’t show me the “code”. I think BPEL is difficult to understand to business people and BPMN is there for us. A BPMS that can translate BPMN (or BPDM) to his execution language (what ever it is) is better for me.

]]> By: Fabian http://www.column2.com/2007/08/bpm-think-tank-day-2-bpel-roundtable/comment-page-1/#comment-5526 Fabian Thu, 02 Aug 2007 20:30:45 +0000 http://www.column2.com/2007/08/bpm-think-tank-day-2-bpel-roundtable/#comment-5526 Regarding your second paragraph: What do you mean with "original specification"? The white paper published in 2005? Wasn't this BPEL4People proposal always about an extension of the BPEL? ("To support a broad range of scenarios that involve people within business processes, a BPEL extension is required.") Regarding your second paragraph: What do you mean with “original specification”? The white paper published in 2005? Wasn’t this BPEL4People proposal always about an extension of the BPEL? (“To support a broad range of scenarios that involve people within business processes, a BPEL extension is required.”)

]]>