Legacy Issue Number: 14743
Source: International Business Machines ( Suzette Samoojh)
Beta 1, Section 8.4
Currently the MM contains a bidirectional relationship between Interface and ServiceRef. This is also represented in the XSD, where the Interface complexType has an element that references a ServiceReference, and the ServiceReference complexType has an element that references an Interface.
In the Samples meeting, it was raised that the Interface->ServiceReference relationship was not needed in the XSD. This discussion resulted in several outstanding questions:
- If it doesn't belong in the XSD, should it be in the MM?
- Tool vendors would find this convenient to have. But is that an implementation issue?
- This likely isn't the only case. Need to have a broader discussion.
- What is the purpose of the MM? How are we positioning it?
- If the MM is for portability, then should the arguments used against the XSD also apply to the MM?
Reported: BPMN 2.0b1 — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 05:00 GMT
Disposition: Resolved — BPMN 2.0
- This issue has been carried over from the BPMN 2.0 submission team
- Ongoing implementation projects do not indicate this is an issue. Close with no changes to the specification (as it is not a problem)
Disposition: Closed, No Change
Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:57 GMT
BPMN2 — Relationship navigation (both in MM and XSD)
- Key: BPMN2-184
- OMG Task Force: BPMN 2.0 FTF