BPMN 2.0 FTF Avatar
  1. OMG Issue

BPMN2 — Page 187, Figure 10-27 Inconsistent use of class hierarchy vs. attributes to define types of subprocess

Open Closed All
  • Key: BPMN2-44
  • Legacy Issue Number: 14317
  • Status: closed  
  • Source: Trisotech ( Mr. Denis Gagne)
  • Summary:

    Reported by dga...@trisotech.com, Jul 29, 2009

    Both Adhoc and Transaction arepresented as specialized class of
    SubProcess, why not the same for Event SubProcess

    On page 187, Figure 10-27, the attribute triggeredByEvent
    defines if the sub-process is an event sub-process. But on page on p. 188
    it is stated that an event is a specialized sub-process. If I take a look
    at the model is says that an ad hoc and transaction can also be
    event-sub-proceses.

    Leads to confusion regarding possible Event based transactions or Event
    Based Adhoc
  • Reported: BPMN 2.0b1 — Fri, 4 Sep 2009 04:00 GMT
  • Disposition: Resolved — BPMN 2.0
  • Disposition Summary:

    Event Sub-Processes should be allowed to be either Ad Hoc or Transactions. Thus, no change is recommended and this issue should be closed.
    Disposition: Closed, No Change
  • Updated: Fri, 6 Mar 2015 20:57 GMT