Being a little provocative here. But I think that questions like this will lead to the nuts and bolts of the API and add meat to the discussion. anonymous wrote : | I think the meeting should be about the specific API to cover the features of our preferred process language. | OK, but that means the fact that JBPM4 does leverage the PVM should be transparent to the API, right? I mean it's an implementation detail then, or is it not? So what do we got? A generic API that tries to be PDL agnostic (PVM) and the suggestion that we focus on one specific PDL and it's API? Is this right? Can you elaborate on how these are distinguished? View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4181425#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...