[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Implementation of XPDL in jBPM
by camunda
Hi Sebastion.
anonymous wrote :
| Since they took the PVM to implement XPDL why didn't they contribute this to the jBPM project but started an own project instead?
|
The Bonita engine is out already quite a while, they just decided to do some joint effort with jbpm and use the PVM in their new version. Bonita 3 was completly independant.
On the other hand it would be really cool to see other engines and products building their own stuff on the PVM. JBoss itself will not develop these themself. And: Embrace choice :-)
anonymous wrote :
| I got confused a bit with the two standarized languages of the WfMC. I'm still new to the topic and to me it looked like there was a strong relation with BPMN on one side for the notation of processes and with XPDL on the other side for the execution of processes.
|
BPMN is from the OMG (like UML), only XPDL is from the WfMC. And my personal view is, they tried to at least participate in the BPMN hype somehow, that's why they tried to make a connection.
anonymous wrote :
| To me it's just crucial to have a standarized format which is vendor-independent and commonly accepted. So in your opinion XPDL is not that important although it's standardised and it would make more sense to wait for BPMN 2.0 which will add semantics and process execution to the BPMN standard?
|
Depends. Is the standard a pure political issue and you have to start today? Then maybe XPDL is a good option. Maybe then it is already sufficient that jbpm 4 uses BPDs (the diagrams standardized in BPMN). Problem is, current BPMN 1.2 doesn't define a XML-File-Format.
Or do you really need vendor independance (why?)? Then BPMN 2.0 would definitley get interesting, but this will still need some time.
But what a coicidence, currently I am writing on a BPMN book (http://www.hanser.de/buch.asp?isbn=978-3-446-41768-7) and I am working on a Proof of concept: a very simple BPMN 2.0 Engine based on the PVM :-)
Cheers
Bernd
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4243115#4243115
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4243115
17 years
[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Implementation of XPDL in jBPM
by sebastian.s
Hello Bernd,
first of all thanks for your personal assessment of this question. I've already read some of the articles you wrote about jBPM and about BPM systems in general and so it's nice to hear the opinion of somebody with your background.
I got confused a bit with the two standarized languages of the WfMC. I'm still new to the topic and to me it looked like there was a strong relation with BPMN on one side for the notation of processes and with XPDL on the other side for the execution of processes. kukultje already pointed out to me that this is not 100% true.
As far what I've seen and heard about jPDL it's not bad at all. To me it's just crucial to have a standarized format which is vendor-independent and commonly accepted. So in your opinion XPDL is not that important although it's standardised and it would make more sense to wait for BPMN 2.0 which will add semantics and process execution to the BPMN standard?
I took a look at the bonita project and one question came popping up immediately to me: Since they took the PVM to implement XPDL why didn't they contribute this to the jBPM project but started an own project instead? Of course they are free to do.
Regarding BPEL I agree. I somehow got the feeling that most people forgot the purpose of BPEL: orchestrating webservices. And the decision to use or not to use it should be based on the project requirements.
Best regards
Sebastian
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4243112#4243112
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4243112
17 years
[Design of JBoss jBPM] - Re: Implementation of XPDL in jBPM
by camunda
Hi Sebastian.
In my experience, XPDL is not really very important today. It is a standard, yes, but not very well known in industrie (among decision makers at least). The WfMC simply did a bad job in merketing... One of its key features is extensability, but this leads to processes, having 80 % of its stuff in extensions. What value does such a standard have?
And BPMN 2.0 clearly target process execution as well, so I expect it to become the much more interesting option. But it is not here yet, so no option to use today.
And if you don't go for BPEL (which may be a good choice in some projects, in a lot of projects not), jPDL is a very good choice as well in my opinion. In the area of OSS it is more mature as XPDL engines. Okay, Bonita is vetry interessting as well, true, and at least they base on the PVM as well (but unfortunately an old version, hopefully they migrate to the latest one) but I think community and support is better at jBPM (If you read it: Sorry Miguel ;-))...
My two cents...
Cheers
Bernd
View the original post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4243103#4243103
Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.org/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&p=4243103
17 years