Комментарии к записи: Моделирование в BPMN решений, принимаемых людьми

Автор: Илья Логинов

Илья Логинов — Wed, 11 Apr 2012 17:20:56 +0000

Что значит автоматическая развилка, а что решение человека? Я так понимаю вы имеете в виду решение человека как нажатие кнопки явное или явное ДА в электронной почте или устно. А автоматическая, это решение после обработки на основании данных? А зачем их разделить? Решение человека это часть задачи, часть его работы и было бы некорректно это микро действие выносить за пределы задачи в какие то там ромбики или отдельные обозначения стрелок. Ибо решение человека, являясь частью задачи может Сопровождаться входящими данными. Во общем считаю удачным ходом отсутствие разделения - решение человека это часть задачи, а не часть чего то за ее пределами, не часть передачи управления след задаче

Автор: Keith

Keith — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 18:48:49 +0000

One more thing: we used the circular “event” symbol because it is natural to represent this choice as an event. Events are exclusive, just like choices. Events happen at a point in time, just like choices. The activity is started and remains in active mode, until completion, either by event or choice. While the activity is active, the worklist item appears on the users worklist, and is removed from the worklist when either an event comes, or a choice is made. To me, the user choice is really just another kind of event.

Автор: Keith

Keith — Fri, 14 Jan 2011 18:45:12 +0000

Thanks for continuing the discussion on this. Your example of adding the response buttons the UI is exactly what we do in Interstage BPM. What is particularly dramatic is that we can edit a process even while it is running, so to simply add a new line from one activity to another instantly adds the new “completion choice” to the UI. It really reduces the complexity.

More posts on BPMN at: http://social-biz.org/tag/bpmn/ and http://social-biz.org/tag/bpm/

Автор: Anatoly Belychook

Anatoly Belychook — Thu, 13 Jan 2011 04:42:09 +0000

Marco

I considered the option you proposed, too. But for me human decision is a task rather than BPMN-style pure (task-less) gateway.

E.g. when a person in charge decides to reject an application, he must specify the reason; when approving, he must specify some other data like budgetig item. We may set up Approve and Reject buttons so that thet will be unavailable until the requested data are entered. Can it be done within your approach?

Kind regards
Anatoly

Автор: Marco Brambilla

Marco Brambilla — Tue, 11 Jan 2011 09:45:07 +0000

I fully agree this is a weakness of BPMN.
We propose an approach based on “user gateways”, you may want to read about it here:
http://marcobrambi.blogspot.com/2011/01/user-gateways-in-bpmn.html
Do you think this could be helpful?

Автор: Scott

Scott — Mon, 10 Jan 2011 02:29:59 +0000

interestingly, Lombardi (now Websphere Lombardi Edition) implements something very much like this for user interfaces, and it is quite intuitive and efficient. the UI drives the possible endpoints, rather than the other way around (which makes sense actually).

Автор: Anatoly Belychook

Anatoly Belychook — Thu, 30 Dec 2010 13:22:38 +0000

Конечно как User. Manual task вообще проходит мимо системы; workflow-движок проскакивает ее не задерживаясь. Фактически это комментарий аналитика: “а в это время…”.

Автор: Andrew Stesin

Andrew Stesin — Thu, 30 Dec 2010 10:06:37 +0000

К слову, а как правильнее обозначить задачу “Рассмотреть заявку” - как “пользовательскую” (с человечком) или как “неавтоматизированную” (с “ладошкой”)?

Автор: Anatoly Belychook

Anatoly Belychook — Thu, 30 Dec 2010 05:42:51 +0000

Bruce

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. Of course the human controlled flows are supposed to be exclusive.

Автор: Bruce Silver

Bruce Silver — Thu, 30 Dec 2010 03:30:32 +0000

Keith Swenson has been urging something like this for a long time. For me, it is not significantly different from conditional sequence flow, and I would have the same objection to your diagram whether it had diamonds or double slashes on the tails: It is not clear that the two output paths are exclusive alternatives or inclusive. You depend on human understanding of the label instead of the explicit behavior of XOR gateway. Whether two paths in a process level are alternatives or parallel flows is crucial to the downstream process. If you were to say that the double slash always means exclusive human choice, I think it would be a harmless addition to the palette, and apparently a welcome one to some people.