CODEWITHSUNDEEP
workflowbpmn
Sergio Figueras
Sergio Figueras

Reputation: 297

XPDL / BPMN 2.0 - What are the objectives?

I'm a little bit confused about BPMN 2.0 and XPDL formats. They're complementary or they have very different objectives?

BPMN < 2.0 was only to graphic notation, and XPDL was to get graphic notation / interaction of the elements.

But today BPMN 2.0 fits all the requirements of XPDL? What's the needing of a BPMN engine to support XPDL?

Thanks.

Upvotes: 2

Views: 3562

Answers (3)

Nicolas Figay
Nicolas Figay

Reputation: 11

Late answer.

As stated in previous answer, BPMN was initially only a notation from OMG, and XPDL a format for interchange of workflow model from Wfmc.

XPDL 2.0 relies on BPMN as a notation, i.e. Wfmc prevented creating its own notation in order to avoid standard war and overlapping between competing standards.

With version 2, BPMN came also with an exchange format, being with XML Model Interchange or an XML Schema in XSD.

However, it is important to point out that BPMN covers as well workflow model (i.e. orchestration with sequenced activities) than not executable models such as choreography or conversation. Also, BPMN doesn't come with an architecture of reference for a workflow system. So the scope is larger and the focus is less precise than for XPDL and Wfmc.

For these reasons, I think that tools relying on XPDL and Wfmc architecture are more mature in terms of interoperability. I particularly appreciate implementation such as Shark and JaWe when willing to understand well architecture of reference of Wfmc and XPDL with BPMN representation. Other implementations exist relying on XPDL 2.0, e.g. Bizagi.

However, one weakness of XPDL 2 is that the way the modeling constructs of a workflow model are represented with BPMN visual elements is not explicitly stated (e.g. a line is a representation of an actor).Such mapping is quite well done in workflow systems originally based on XPDL (e.g. Shark).

In the reverse, I never identified any initiative in the BPMN community related to workflow engines and modelers interoperability. The working group for BPMN interoperability was more addressing exchanges between modelers.

So interoperability based on BPMN 2.0 between workflow engines is also a subject to improvement.

Upvotes: 0

DaNeSh
DaNeSh

Reputation: 1062

Trisotech Company through businessprocessincubator.com services, and it's web modeler has the feature of converting XPDL(2.1, 2.2, 3) to BPMN and reverse.

http://www.businessprocessincubator.com/convert-xpdl-to-bpmn-with-layout.html

Upvotes: 0

Timotheus.Kampik
Timotheus.Kampik

Reputation: 2505

As far as I know, BPMN 2.0 and XPDL are not complementary.

BPMN 2.0 provides both a definition of the graphical language and the underlying XML standard. If a BPX engine supports BPMN 2.0, it does not necessarily need to support XDPL, but might do so, e.g. in case an interface to an XPDL compatible and not BPMN 2.0 compatible tool exists.

I know for sure that there are vendors and projects in this area who are strongly focusing on BPMN 2.0 and are largely ignoring XPDL, e.g. for BPMN 2.0 seems to be more successful in facilitating consent regarding the interchange of diagrams: http://www.omgwiki.org/bpmn-miwg/doku.php

Upvotes: 1

Related Questions