ObjectWeb Consortium
Search ObjectWeb Mail Archive: 

Advanced Search - Powered by Google


Mail Archive Home | jawe List | May 2004 Index

<--  Date Index  --> <--  Thread Index  -->

Re: [jawe] Start/End bubbles


Hi,

Can you explain me the difference among our Start/End bubbles (that are after 
all written as ext. attributes), and extended
attributes you are mentioning? The only difference I see is that we make our 
ext. attributes visually by putting Start/End bubbles,
and you would do it in some activity's property dialog?
In my opinion, the only thing that current JaWE is missing is item 4) (the 
use of start/end bubbles during verification), and this
is something we should implement.

Regards,
Sasa.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael N. Lipp" <mnl@xxxxxx>
To: <jawe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 9:28 AM
Subject: Re: [jawe] Start/End bubbles


> Sasa Bojanic wrote:
>
> >I think that introducing special route activity represented by bubbles 
> >would be an overcome - one more activity to execute
without
> >any need.
> >
> >
> If being represented as a bubble is the only "special" thing about the
> start-/end-route activities, this seems like a fine solution.
>
> Actually, introducing a noop start activity is what we (WfMOpen/WfMCore
> users) do if the "real" start activity has an incoming transition
> because it is part of a loop. Often, however, it shows that some initial
> actions can also be performed in the start activity. So by not
> restricting this activity to a route activity, we can execute intial
> processing steps in the start activity (like loop counter initialization
> ;-) ).
>
> How about this for JaWE: (1) start- and end-activities are created as
> regular activities with a (JaWe-)editor property of being start- or end-
> activities. (2) Due to this property being set, the activities are
> displayed differently and have default names "start" and "end". (3)
> Again due to this property (which can be cleared in case something has
> e.g. to be appended to an end activity after all) the editor does not
> allow creation of incoming transitions for start-activities and outgoing
> transitions of end-activities. (4) The requirement to use start- and
> end-activities in order to get a successful verification should be made
> an option which defaults to "no" if XPDL is opened that has not been
> created by JaWE (if created by JaWE, the value is explicitly set in an
> extended attribute) and has a default value for new processes that can
> be specified in the user's preferences.
>
> This would support both people who want to have resp. do not need start-
> and end-activities while providing maximum compatibility with run-time
> engines as well as other editors. The JaWE documentation should make it
> perfectly clear that these start- and end- activities require the same
> processing time like any other activity of the chosen type (i.e. minimum
> the time of a route activity).
>
>  - Michael
>
> (Don't know about you, but I think we'll do it like this in our editor.)
>
>
>
>


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


>
> --
> You receive this message as a subscriber of the jawe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx mailing 
> list.
> To unsubscribe: mailto:jawe-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For general help: mailto:sympa@xxxxxxxxxxxxx?subject=help
> ObjectWeb mailing lists service home page: http://www.objectweb.org/wws
>




<--  Date Index  --> <--  Thread Index  -->

Reply via email to:

Powered by MHonArc.

Copyright © 1999-2005, ObjectWeb Consortium | contact | webmaster.