BPMN: Data objects vs Classes?
56 views
Skip to first unread message
Erik Nygaard@localhost Svend Erik Nygaard
Oct 9, 2014, 11:35:44 AM10/9/14
to sparx-enterprise-archite...@googlegroups.com
In my concept/information model I have classes representing physical objects as well as information objects. We have definitions, descriptions and a ton of other valuable specs/connections associated with these clases.
However in BPMN it is suggested that I use a ”Dataobject” element (as physical objects or information objects).
On the DataObject I can specify an ”ItemDefinition” element, and then on the Itemdefinition I can specify my class from my conceptual/information model. To me this is a lot of indirection a lot of extra work and elements:
DataObject.itemSubjectRef -> ItemDefinition.structureRef -> Class
That gives me three elements instead of one.
EA BPMN actually does not prevent me from using my Class elements directly with the BPMN data associations instead of the DataObject Object elements. So I’m very tempted to just use my classes directly in BPMN (or instances – or instances with states)
Is that a bad idea? Have I misunderstood the way to link from BPMN to my classes in concept/information model?
[original message]
However in BPMN it is suggested that I use a ”Dataobject” element (as physical objects or information objects).
On the DataObject I can specify an ”ItemDefinition” element, and then on the Itemdefinition I can specify my class from my conceptual/information model. To me this is a lot of indirection a lot of extra work and elements:
DataObject.itemSubjectRef -> ItemDefinition.structureRef -> Class
That gives me three elements instead of one.
EA BPMN actually does not prevent me from using my Class elements directly with the BPMN data associations instead of the DataObject Object elements. So I’m very tempted to just use my classes directly in BPMN (or instances – or instances with states)
Is that a bad idea? Have I misunderstood the way to link from BPMN to my classes in concept/information model?
[original message]
qwerty
Oct 9, 2014, 2:55:47 PM10/9/14
to sparx-enterprise-archite...@googlegroups.com
I'm not a BPMN guru but I guess that when you deal with business processes you refer to objects, not classes. So at least you should take instances.
q.
[original message]
q.
[original message]
ken.norcross
Oct 9, 2014, 4:26:23 PM10/9/14
to sparx-enterprise-archite...@googlegroups.com
If you are not going to fully define your BPMN and then execute it with a BPM engine, then it doesn't seem to help much to use all of the layers of indirection.
As a middle ground, you could use the BPMN elements in the BPMN diagrams and then "trace" them to UML elements of your data model, probably in another mapping diagram. This would just allow you to keep the two modeling languages separate, and you would have 2 elements + 1 relation, reducing complexity a little.
[original message]
As a middle ground, you could use the BPMN elements in the BPMN diagrams and then "trace" them to UML elements of your data model, probably in another mapping diagram. This would just allow you to keep the two modeling languages separate, and you would have 2 elements + 1 relation, reducing complexity a little.
[original message]
Mitchell@localhost Ian Mitchell
Oct 13, 2014, 8:56:09 AM10/13/14
to sparx-enterprise-archite...@googlegroups.com
I teach BPMN quite a bit (that doesn't mean I'm a 'guru') but I favour simplicity of your meta-model over BPMN purity any day.
The downside is, of course, that a readers of your BPMN diagrams will see Classes where they expect Data Objects, but most people with even a little UML/BPMN knowledge should get the idea.
So my advice would be 'keep it simple' and use Classes. And make a note of your decision in your meta-model documentation - you DO have a documented metamodel don't you... ;)
[original message]
The downside is, of course, that a readers of your BPMN diagrams will see Classes where they expect Data Objects, but most people with even a little UML/BPMN knowledge should get the idea.
So my advice would be 'keep it simple' and use Classes. And make a note of your decision in your meta-model documentation - you DO have a documented metamodel don't you... ;)
[original message]
Vos@localhost Jacob Vos
Oct 14, 2014, 1:05:57 AM10/14/14
to sparx-enterprise-archite...@googlegroups.com
Erik Nygaard@localhost Svend Erik Nygaard
Oct 21, 2014, 9:15:31 AM10/21/14
to sparx-enterprise-archite...@googlegroups.com
(I'm back on the BPMN stuff now)
Thanks everyone. At least I can see, you have the same considerations as I do :-/
I think I'll have to use instances (either DataObjects or Class Instances) - if not for other reasons then in order to present multiple instance states of the same class in multiple places on the same process diagram.
[original message]
Thanks everyone. At least I can see, you have the same considerations as I do :-/
I think I'll have to use instances (either DataObjects or Class Instances) - if not for other reasons then in order to present multiple instance states of the same class in multiple places on the same process diagram.
[original message]
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages