Thomas, Personally I think there is a little to much emphasis on BPMN and the workflow patterns, unless it really is the intention to support them (both the patterns and bpmn) According to http://is.tm.tue.nl/research/patterns/ this is the old site and contains older patterns. The newer site (http://www.workflowpatterns.com/patterns/control/index.php) contains many more patterns. The older ones are already supported by jBPM as you can see in the testcases. I started working on the newer ones about a year ago, but stopped after a published report about limited support in jBPM. Tom has a different opinion about the way they should be supported compared to the authors of the (academic) papers. So we should either put a lot of effort in the patterns to get jBPM on http://www.workflowpatterns.com/vendors/index.php or pay less attention to them. The same is true regarding BPMN. anonymous wrote : We will look at various options of bringing the aspect of execution to the BPMN model. Ultimately we will have BPMN conform process model that can somehow be executed on the ProcessEngine If this really is the case, JBoss should put it's foot where it's mouth is and act on it. Just stating it gives a bad impression and unrealistic expectations. So a 'roadmap' for this is important. But besides this 'comment' I think the additional work you (and Heiko) do is great. View the original post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=viewtopic&p=4164582#... Reply to the post : http://www.jboss.com/index.html?module=bb&op=posting&mode=reply&a...