Comments on: BPM2012: Papers on Process Model Analysis

By: Sandy Kemsley

Sandy Kemsley — Tue, 18 Sep 2012 17:22:14 +0000

Vishal, that’s a great way to put it, although I think that the problem might be with analysts being able to understand that they can even do that with a model. For those unaccustomed to BPMN, the idea that you can have a “finish everything outstanding and continue” is a bit foreign.

By: Vishal Saxena

Vishal Saxena — Mon, 17 Sep 2012 06:13:51 +0000

Sandy – I think it would be easier to describe it as follows: Use this gateway when you want all pending tasks to finish. This simple definition powerfully describes the underlying semantics of upstream tokens and token flow.

By: Sandy Kemsley

Sandy Kemsley — Tue, 11 Sep 2012 09:47:39 +0000

Vishal, I agree that it’s a very useful construct, although can be a bit confusing for some users.

By: IOR Gateway BPMN 2.0

IOR Gateway BPMN 2.0 — Thu, 06 Sep 2012 05:26:31 +0000

[...] requirements, how do we ensure that these semantics are preserved at runtime? Take a look at this paper presented recently at the BPM 2012 conference. The IOR gateway is probably the most powerful [...]

By: Vishal Saxena

Vishal Saxena — Thu, 06 Sep 2012 02:06:07 +0000

Thanks Sandy,
This is the exact issue when transforming from BPMN to another language and hits at the crux of BPM success. How do I model the business process which says, ok I will wait for all pending tasks to finish and then print the invoice. This ties in to the execution semantics and highlights the importance of IOR join semantics in a particularly large business process model.