Between Pools, only message flows are allowed, between Activities inside a Pool, only sequence flows are allowed.If it does not, it is a ‘black pool’: the Participant is there, but the actual process details are unknown. A Participant (which may also be called Pool, the terms are synonyms in BPMN, that is: a Pool is the ‘graphical representation’ of a Participant) may or may not contain a Process.A Process contains Activities connected by sequence flows (and gateways, but that can be safely left out at this stage).In that formalization, they chose the following setup: Studying BPMN with Bruce’s help resulted in me understanding something about BPMN that - if I look at many other examples and publications - is understood in a couple of contradicting ways: the meaning of Pool/Participant in BPMN.īPMN took the rather unstandardized ‘flow charting’ and formalized it. Very helpful in that respect was Bruce Silver’s “BPMN Method & Style”, which, I must say is understandably the ‘gold standard’ for BPMN modeling out there. The previous post in this series about ArchiMate and BPMN can be found here.Ĭoming from ArchiMate, the first stumbling block was of course properly understanding BPMN. ![]() In this post, I discuss one of the important issues: BPMN’s Pools and Processes. In a couple of posts, I want to explain what the solution is, and also a bit on what the stumbling blocks to a solution were. Now that some time has passed, we have come to a solution, though at this stage it is not yet 100% complete. ![]() ![]() Earlier, I wrote about an ongoing attempt to map #BPMN to #ArchiMate.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |