-
Rick Geneva describes event-based gateways in BPMN 2.0. I still think that these have become way too complex for the average non-technical process modeler, although create a more descriptive process modeling language.
Pages
Feeds
-
Recent Posts
Categories
- ACM
- BAM
- BI
- blogging
- BPA
- BPM
- BPM history
- BPM standards
- BPMG-BPTG
- BRM
- business
- case management
- CEP
- cloud
- compliance
- CrisisCampTO
- EA
- EAI
- ECM
- ESB
- Lean Six Sigma
- Links
- mashups
- MDM
- off topic
- open source
- outsourcing
- PKBoK
- Rant
- SOA
- social
- Software design
- sustainability
- technology
- torcamp
- Vendors
- Web20
- ·conferences
- Appian World
- Architecture&Process
- ARISProcessWorld
- BBC
- BEAparticipate
- BPF
- BPM2009
- BPM2010
- BPM2011
- BPMcamp
- BPMGProcess2006
- BPMThinkTank
- BrainStorm2007
- BusinessRulesForum
- CASCON
- DemoCamp
- E2 conf
- E2.0 TTW
- ExperienceTech
- FASTforward
- FileNet
- Forrester
- Gartner
- IBM
- IIR BPM
- InnovationWorld
- IntlBPM
- IQPC
- IRM BPM
- IT360
- Lombardi
- mashupcamp
- NewSoftwareIndustry
- Open Group
- Pegasystems
- Proforma
- Progress
- SAP
- SharedInsightsPCC
- TIBCO
- TransitCamp
- Ultimus
Archives
-
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License. -
{ 1 } Comments
Sandy, thanks for the link. I agree with you that the full spec is way too hard to understand. I’m working on solving this problem by trying to figure out what people actually need to know to survive the spec, and where someone should get started. My first cut at covering the BPMN 2.0 spec is going to be about the changes from BPMN 1.2, then I’ll come back for another pass, writing about how to consume the spec. Right now I think that for anyone getting started, stick with BPMN 1.2 for now. After getting started I suggest going back and learning what is changing in 2.0. But starting from scratch in 2.0 might be a bigger bite than most people can swallow.
- Rick Geneva
Post a Comment