Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
AW: AW: [jwt-dev] Re: STP/IM questions/help

Hi Juan,
 
thanks for your Wiki-page. I'm not sure whether the JWT2STP-IM transformations would fit there as well or whether they would better be covered in the JWT-CVS.
 
My students have nearly finished their informal description which concepts of JWT shall be transformed in which concepts of STP-IM. They will present their ideas on Friday and next week they'll start with the actual implementation. We'll send a link to the document describing the ideas of the transformation in the next days.
 
I guess especially on topics of the implementation using ATL both of us can benefit from working together and sharing ideas.
 
Best regards,
 
Florian


Von: Juan José Cadavid Gómez [mailto:juanjosecg@xxxxxxxxx]
Gesendet: 11 May 2008 07:16
An: 'Florian Lautenbacher'; 'Java Workflow Toolbox'; 'Andrea Zoppello'
Cc: 'Marius Brendle'; 'Adrian Mos'
Betreff: RE: AW: [jwt-dev] Re: STP/IM questions/help

Hello Florian, all,

 

Thanks a lot for your welcome! I’m excited for the chance to work with you all and of course, I’d be happy to collaborate with your group at the University!

 

To begin, I will be studying the existing BPMN to STP-IM which has been implemented using the EMF generated Java APIs of both metamodels, in order to understand it better and then implement the STP-IM to SCA transformation with Adrian. The short term goal is to enable to user to model a business process and obtain the architecture model of a composite application supporting this process. I will try to document these conceptual mappings in the wiki as much as I can and let you know ;)

 

About the transformation mechanism, the EMF generated APIs is the most flexible and straightforward option for us developers, however it’d be nice to have the transformation rules separate from other concerns such as reading/persisting models, accessing annotations etc., and also have them comply with OMG’s QVT standard. As such, using ATL would make a better choice in the long run, although we have to evaluate how this would work inside STP. The only thing I’m not sure at the moment is about the best way to launch ATL transformations programmatically, whether invoking Ant scripts or using the ATL APIs. Does anyone have a final word on this?

 

Also, I have created a page describing the current STP-IM plug-in structure as it stands today in the SVN repository, for all of us to benefit [1]. I hope you can take a look and provide the necessary edits! Thanks a lot!

 

-Juan

 

[1]  http://wiki.eclipse.org/STP/IM_Component/Plug-in_Structure

 

 

From: Florian Lautenbacher [mailto:florian.lautenbacher@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 10:03 AM
To: 'Java Workflow Toolbox'; 'Andrea Zoppello'
Cc: 'Juan Cadavid'; 'Marius Brendle'
Subject: AW: AW: [jwt-dev] Re: STP/IM questions/help

 

Hi Adrian, hi Andrea,

 

thanks for your support in our questions. I can understand that you are only integrating new concepts into STP-IM in a few months, but this makes it of course hard for us at the moment to decide which concepts to use for the transformations. So, we are unsure whether we simply introduce new concepts for the moment in our copy of the STP-IM (to cover the workflow aspects) and contribute them within a bug to the development of STP-IM or whether we simply stay with its current layout (where it is sometimes difficult to identify all concepts we need). Probably, we will only implement a short subset for the moment and when the STP-IM has been polished, then we include the remaining parts.

 

Thanks for changing Transition to a Configurable element and also thanks for your assistance with Conditions, Owner, Service and the ecore_diagram-file.

 

And, of course: hello to Juan Cadavid who will work on transformation starting with STP-IM and going somewhere else ;-) What exactly is the focus of the first transformation? BPEL? SCA? BPMN? How are these transformations done? Using ATL, QVT? Maybe Juan and our group here at the University could benefit by asking questions concerning the transformations to each other!?

 

Till next Friday all conceptual work will be finished, so we will have decided then which concepts from JWT will be transformed into what concept in STP-IM and after that the implementation will start (most probably using ATL). Here my students will have a look on the already implemented JWT to BPMN transformations by Stéphane and will implement their transformations in a similar way.

 

I will keep you updated as soon as we got some news.

 

Best regards,

 

Florian

 

 


Von: jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im Auftrag von Adrian Mos
Gesendet: 06 May 2008 12:35
An: Java Workflow Toolbox; Andrea Zoppello
Cc: Juan Cadavid; Marius Brendle
Betreff: Re: AW: [jwt-dev] Re: STP/IM questions/help

Hi Guys,

 

Sorry for the late reply, I've been away until this morning. 

First of all it's great to see that you guys are working on this, and it's only natural that questions arise. As you have guessed it, the IM is not yet completely polished and it's also trough feedback like this that we can improve it. I also want to take the opportunity to introduce to you Juan Cadavid (in CC) who will work on BPMN/BPEL/SCA/etc :) transformations using the STP-IM. He has recently been awarded an internship scholarship through the Google Summer of Code to work on this. Juan, perhaps it would be a good idea to subscribe to the jwt mailing lists so that you can follow this relationship between JWT and STP-IM more closely.

 

As Andrea said, the Owner and Service Classification have been introduced with the concept of UDDI in mind and I also think it's probably best we don't use them for workflow modelling, unless of course you have a strong need for them, in which case we can try and come up with the best solution to this.

 

Andrea has already made the change to make the Transition a configurable element, please let us know if this helps and what other problems you encounter with the transformations. It would also be great if you could keep us updated with the progress of this in general so that we can follow up with suggestions and so on.

 

Thanks,

Adrian.


---------------

Adrian Mos

ObjectWeb Project

SOA Technical Lead

 

+33 4 76 61 54 02

 

INRIA Rhone-Alpes

655 avenue de l'Europe - Montbonnot

38 334 Saint Ismier Cedex France

 

On May 6, 2008, at 9:13 AM, Andrea Zoppello wrote:



Hi Florian,

See the comments inline

1) Owner and Service Classification were not introduced with the concept of workflow in "mind", but were
introduced to support in future the concept of "service registries like uddi", so in my opinion it's better you don't use these
two entities for modeling workflow scenario.
My suggestion is not to use these two entities for modeling workflow enitities in IM

BTW in the next month, we're going to exactly introcude workflow concept like role, "Human Based Step" on IM beacuse we need them
Unfortunately, now i'm quite busy and i've not so much time to do that.

Basically my idea is to introduce a sub class of step ( RoleBasedStep ) to model workflow activities

2) If you take the code from sv you could look at the emf model in graphical way
looking at the stpmodel.ecore_diagram file

3) If you look at the diagran  you could find that a TransitionUnderCondition is a Transition with a Condition entity associated where
a condition could be A PropertyCondition ( subclass of Condition ) or an _expression_ Condition ( subclass of condition ) where you could find
an _expression_ language attribute.

4) At the moment Transition are not "ConfigurableElement" but i think i'm going to change this this today so Transition will
be ConfigurationElement.


Hope this help.


Andrea Zoppello

Florian Lautenbacher ha scritto:

Hi Andrea,

 

thanks for your fast reply. Since we want to have a mature transformation,

it is difficult for us to build on something that might be removed or might

be created in the future :-)

So I guess we will currently focus on Owner and ServiceClassification

without considering that those might be subject of change in the future. You

said that TransitionUnderCondition is used for a BPMN Exclusive Gateway?

Where exactly do you specify the condition then? Is this a property of the

TransitionUnderCondition (as a Configurable Element)? Is there a way to

specify which (_expression_) language this condition is based on?

Mostly we are using the .ecore-file from the SVN, but sometimes its easier

to view it graphically in the wiki...

 

Thanks for your assistance and best regards,

 

Florian

 

-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----

Von: jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:jwt-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] Im

Auftrag von Andrea Zoppello

Gesendet: 05 May 2008 17:06

An: Marius Brendle

Cc: jwt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx

Betreff: [jwt-dev] Re: STP/IM questions/help

 

Hi,

 

1) Owner and ServiceClassification are really not used at the moment, and i

think we're going to think and define well in future when we're going to

approach to model workflow scenarios in IntermediateModel.

 

My personal idea is to add a Role entity and to have a subclass of "Step"

called "RoleAssignedStep" or something similar that will define that a

particular step will be assigned and will be performed by a specific role

 

2) A "TransitionUnderCondition" must be used when the transition is

conditioned to some rule to happen ( we use this ) for exampleto model the

transition outcoming from a bpmn exclusive gateway.

 

3) We choose all the entity to be subclass of configurable element, so each

element could have properties.

 

Maybe the wiki documentation is a little out of date, btw the version used

is the one you could find in the svn repository.

Hope this helps.

 

Andrea Zoppello

 

Marius Brendle ha scritto:


 

Hello Andrea & Adrian,

we're working on a project of Florian Lauterbacher at the University in Augsburg (Germany). Our goal is to do a model transformation of the JWT (AgilPro) meta-model to the STP Intermediate Model.

Even in the recent SVN snapshot, there are several model elements

(classes) like Owner, ServiceClassification, TransitionUnderCondition and ObservableAttrible without any attributes! Could it be possible that the STP/IM is incomplete until now at this point? Or is this a wanted design decision by you? Or should we do some decisions by ourselves? Perhaps all the above mentioned classes are also of the type "ConfigurableElement" (so addional properties could be added), but this is not the case in the model or the Wiki at this point!

How will the "ControlServices" be handled? In the Wiki there is mentioned that this is not completed till now...

Thank you for the help in advice!

Kind regards,

Christian, Stephan and Marius

   

 

 


 



--

*Andrea Zoppello*
___________________________________________
<www.spagoworld.org>

Spagic Architect
___________________________________________

Architect
Research & Innovation Division
*Engineering Ingegneria Informatica S.p.A.
*
Corso Stati Uniti, 23/C - 35127 Padova - Italy
Phone:  +39-049.8692511    Fax:+39-049.8692566

*www.eng.it                    www.spagoworld.org*




_______________________________________________
jwt-dev mailing list
jwt-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/jwt-dev

 


Back to the top