-
Key: UAF14-129
-
Status: open
-
Source: Eclectica Systems Ltd ( Nic Plum)
-
Summary:
p40, 41 - 8.1.4 View Specifications::Operational::Processes - View Specification Op-Pr Operational Processes BPMN Semantics
The DMM is supposed to be an agnostic specification. This clearly shows the bottom-up derivation of the DMM by chopping bits out of the UML profile.
1) The title is invalid - no architecture viewpoint should be named after a particular ADL implementation - the name ought to be 'Operational Processes' if that reflects the purpose/ concern not the means of realising this.
'Concerns: captures activity-based behavior and flows using BPMN notation.'
2) This is invalid - the ADL or method is never part of a valid concern. The stakeholders presumably only care about the processes not how they are represented.'Definition: describes the BPMN processes that are normally conducted in the course of achieving business goals that support a capability. It describes operational activities, their Inputs/Outputs, operational activity actions and flows between them using BPMN notation.'
3) This is invalid. It should describe processes. It shouldn't contain any reference to any particular ADL, UML or SysML element names et al
Recommended Implementation: BPMN Process Diagram.
4) It shouldn't make reference to any technology or ADL. In any case why can't processes be described using a UML ACtivity Diagram? What's so special that this has to be BPMN?
5) Figure 8:27 shows many BPMN elements. Delete them - they have no valid place in the DMM
-
Reported: UAF 1.2 — Wed, 24 Apr 2024 08:28 GMT
-
Updated: Fri, 20 Dec 2024 14:57 GMT
UAF14 — View Specification Op-Pr Operational Processes BPMN Semantics - Invalid Concern, Representation in an Agnostic Metamodel
- Key: UAF14-129
- OMG Task Force: Unified Architecture Framework (UAF) 1.4 RTF