nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

As we transition to the new Hyland Community, some post links may be temporarily disrupted as we finalize redirects. We apologize for the inconvenience and are working to resolve this as quickly as possible. Details.

BPMN 2.0 and the future of BPEL

activiti-admin

Does your standardisation on BPMN 2.0 mean that you do not believe BPEL has a future?

Find more posts tagged with

Comments

jbarrez

BPEL has its use cases (ie service orchestration in a world where everything is WS-*).
But we believe that for doing BPM, BPEL simply doesn't cut it. And we're not the only company thinking that.
BPMN 2.0 is clearly the way to go if you want to do BPM.

jeff1

hi, jbarrez.
I wonder weather activiti will support service orchestration, since BPMN2 do has such features(receive/send/service/etc.)

jbarrez

@Jeff: service(java call/WebService call/Rest call?), send / receive is planned to be implemented.

jeff1

wonderful!
activiti would be a very strong opponent of some commercial products if activiti supports the features like service orchestration / mainstream ERP system access capabilities / etc., such features will strongly enhance the capabilities of system integration.
although activiti may be not positioned as such positioning, I think jBPM is more concerned about the human task, and activiti will do more

activiti-admin

Thanks for the response.

Whilst I agree that BPEL suits Web service Orchestration, I cant see the point in having two standard. So if there is to be standardisation on BPMN then it will have to subsume BPEL's capabilities as in our experience we don't have BPM process that don't have Web service calls in them.

jbarrez

@Guest: I agree, there is no point in keeping the two standards alive. BPMN 2.0 has all the capabilities on board that BPEL has.

activiti-admin

BPMN and BPEL are not at odds. Not only that, BPEL support is required for "BPMN Complete Conformance". If you don't believe me, look at the <a href="http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0/">most recent BPMN spec</a>. In section 2. Conformance, it says that the only way to get "BPMN Complete Conformance" is to have support for (among other things) the "BPEL Process Execution Semantics Conformance type".

wir33658

wonderful!
activiti would be a very strong opponent of some commercial products if activiti supports the features like service orchestration / mainstream ERP system access capabilities / etc., such features will strongly enhance the capabilities of system integration.
although activiti may be not positioned as such positioning, I think jBPM is more concerned about the human task, and activiti will do more

Yes, and hopefully it lets you integrate with code easily, because in this respect it will become easy for automated systems to be integrated in a process flow (no - or almost no - human interaction).