[jbpm-dev] [Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: super-state, scope or something else

[brittm]

I found "super-state" to be a poor term initially, as Ronald described.  

Using 'scope' opens up a myriad of issues in my mind, since really everything has a scope.  I would tend to start looking for how the same scope info was being applied in the data model to all levels of the process hierarchy.

"Group" would be confusing to me as well (but only because I already use that term in all my assignment handler configurations)--never the less, I think Ronald is right--and just because a particular language uses a term doesn't mean jpdl/jbpm has to, or should, avoid it.  If it's the right word, then it's the right word.

In the end, I tend to go with naming things what they are, even if it's a little inconvenient initially--everyone seems to be happier in the long term.  I would love to be able to use the terms 'wait' and 'group' for 'state' and 'super-state'.



View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4231403#4231403

Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4231403