Issue 10375: Section: 10.1.3 (bpmn-ftf) Source: (, ) Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor Summary: After reading the following on BPMN - BPMN OMG Final Adopted Specification of March 6 2006, - Introduction to BPMN by Stephen A.WHite, IBM Corporation. In the latter paper are the following statements: "Pools are used to represent Participants in the process" "Message flow is defined as the mechansism to show the communication between two participants" "Lanes are often used to separate the activities associated with a company function or role" With the above three statements, I am having difficulty understanding the rationale for the below statement about BPMN "Sequence Flow may cross the boundaries of Lanes within a Pool, but Message Flow may not be used between FLow objects in Lanes of the same Pool". To model the process of how a Customer project is executed by a company, I want to model Organisation Units (e.g. Sales, Development) as Pools and roles inside those Units as Lanes (e.g. Project Manager, Team Leader, Architect, Developer etc), Message Flows can be used to represent the interactions between Sales and Development Units. But I am not allowed to use Message Flows to represent the interactions between an Architect and the Developer. WHy? Am I using the pools and lanes in a manner that is against the philosophy of BPMN? I tried to get an answer from BPMN OMG Final Adopted Specification of March 6 2006, but the rationale was not very clear. Please could I have a clarification for the rationale between not allowing message flows between lanes in the same pool. Resolution: Suggested Resolution: Close, No Change: This issue is out of scope for the RTF and will be addressed by the response to the BPMN 2.0 RFP. Revised Text: None Disposition: Closed, deferred Revised Text: Actions taken: September 27, 2006: received issue July 18, 2008: closed issue Discussion: Defer: The modification suggested by this issue is out of scope for the FTF. This will be handled through other OMG mechanisms, such as an RFP for the next version of BPMN. End of Annotations:===== m: webmaster@omg.org Date: 27 Sep 2006 09:56:41 -0400 To: Subject: Issue/Bug Report -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Name: Shobha Radhakrishnan Company: Vanderlande Industries mailFrom: shobha.radhakrishnan@nl.vanderlande.com Notification: Yes Specification: BPMN Specification Section: 10.1.3 FormalNumber: dtc/06-02-01 Version: dtc/06-02-01 RevisionDate: 06-02-01 Page: 102,86, 87 Nature: Clarification Severity: Minor HTTP User Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322) Description After reading the following on BPMN - BPMN OMG Final Adopted Specification of March 6 2006, - Introduction to BPMN by Stephen A.WHite, IBM Corporation. In the latter paper are the following statements: "Pools are used to represent Participants in the process" "Message flow is defined as the mechansism to show the communication between two participants" "Lanes are often used to separate the activities associated with a company function or role" With the above three statements, I am having difficulty understanding the rationale for the below statement about BPMN "Sequence Flow may cross the boundaries of Lanes within a Pool, but Message Flow may not be used between FLow objects in Lanes of the same Pool". To model the process of how a Customer project is executed by a company, I want to model Organisation Units (e.g. Sales, Development) as Pools and roles inside those Units as Lanes (e.g. Project Manager, Team Leader, Architect, Developer etc), Message Flows can be used to represent the interactions between Sales and Development Units. But I am not allowed to use Message Flows to represent the interactions between an Architect and the Developer. WHy? Am I using the pools and lanes in a manner that is against the philosophy of BPMN? I tried to get an answer from BPMN OMG Final Adopted Specification of March 6 2006, but the rationale was not very clear. Please could I have a clarification for the rationale between not allowing message flows between lanes in the same pool. To: bpmn-ftf@omg.org Subject: Proposed Resolution for Issue 10375 X-Mailer: Lotus Notes Release 7.0 HF242 April 21, 2006 From: Stephen A White Date: Tue, 5 Dec 2006 08:13:21 -0500 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on D03NM690/03/M/IBM(Release 7.0.2HF32 | October 17, 2006) at 12/05/2006 06:13:21, Serialize complete at 12/05/2006 06:13:21 This is intended for Ballot 5 Issue 10375: Why Prohibit Message Flow within Pools? Description: After reading the following on BPMN - BPMN OMG Final Adopted Specification of March 6 2006, - Introduction to BPMN by Stephen A.WHite, IBM Corporation. In the latter paper are the following statements: "Pools are used to represent Participants in the process" "Message flow is defined as the mechansism to show the communication between two participants" "Lanes are often used to separate the activities associated with a company function or role" With the above three statements, I am having difficulty understanding the rationale for the below statement about BPMN "Sequence Flow may cross the boundaries of Lanes within a Pool, but Message Flow may not be used between FLow objects in Lanes of the same Pool". To model the process of how a Customer project is executed by a company, I want to model Organisation Units (e.g. Sales, Development) as Pools and roles inside those Units as Lanes (e.g. Project Manager, Team Leader, Architect, Developer etc), Message Flows can be used to represent the interactions between Sales and Development Units. But I am not allowed to use Message Flows to represent the interactions between an Architect and the Developer. WHy? Am I using the pools and lanes in a manner that is against the philosophy of BPMN? I tried to get an answer from BPMN OMG Final Adopted Specification of March 6 2006, but the rationale was not very clear. Please could I have a clarification for the rationale between not allowing message flows between lanes in the same pool. Suggested Resolution: Defer: The modification suggested by this issue is out of scope for the FTF. This will be handled through other OMG mechanisms, such as an RFP for the next version of BPMN. Revised Text: None