Issue 15959: number of start events for sub-processes (bpmn2-rtf) Source: (, ) Nature: Revision Severity: Significant Summary: The specification defines that the type for start-events of sub-processes can only be the none-type... However, the allowed number of start events for sub-processes is not mentioned... at least I couldn't find it throughout the whole specification. As far as I understood BPMN, two none-typed start-events in sub-processes would not make sense but the point should clearly be described in a specification. Resolution: Revised Text: Actions taken: January 14, 2011: received issue Discussion: End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 14 Jan 2011 06:56:28 -0500 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report ******************************************************************************* Name: Matthias Schrepfer Employer: camunda services GmbH mailFrom: matthias.schrepfer@camunda.com Terms_Agreement: I agree Specification: BPMN2.0 beta 2 Section: 10.4.2 FormalNumber: dtc/2010-06-05 Version: 2.0 Doc_Year: 2010 Doc_Month: June Doc_Day: 05 Page: 248 Title: number of start events for sub-processes Nature: Revision Severity: Significant CODE: 3TMw8 B1: Report Issue Description: The specification defines that the type for start-events of sub-processes can only be the none-type... However, the allowed number of start events for sub-processes is not mentioned... at least I couldn't find it throughout the whole specification. As far as I understood BPMN, two none-typed start-events in sub-processes would not make sense but the point should clearly be described in a specification. Subject: [Issue 15959] Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2011 14:58:57 +0100 X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Issue 15959] Thread-Index: AcvC4PN4rCnIzbL2QZy/01QOO+SPXw== From: Natschläger Christine To: There might be one fitting sentence in the BPMN Specification: There MAY be multiple Start Events for a given Process level. I think that this also applies to Sub-Processes. Several Start Events can create several instances (similar to top-level processes) and would, therefore, make sense. However, I agree that this point should be described more clearly in the specification.