This paper should probably be a key reference in the baseline research.
- In the introduction points out the rapid growth of paradigms and methods with terms and technologies that were not well defined, and languages that duplicated features, lacked formalisms, and lacked validation on real business systems.
- There is a beautiful figure that organizes the entire paper's contents (Figure 1)
- Classifications of BPM standards: grapical, execution, interchange, diagnosis
- van der Aalst's BPM life cycle figure - "Process Design, System Configuration, Process Enactment, Diagnosis, repeat"... we don't exactly do this, either adding the double/triple-loop mentality, or adding another step of reconfiguration into the figure.
- Diagnosis standards are the closest possible thing to the research we've already conducted
- Investigates the differences between BPM, Workflow Management, and Business Process Reengineering
- Developed a classification process, which is pretty cool. Basic flow chart.
- Unfortunately, the first decision is "Is this standard for Web Services?", if yes they categorize as a Web Service / SOA Standard (not sure if they do anything after that).
- Key things they identify: BPM/SOA/B2B, Background (source), Theory/Graphical/Interchange/Execution/Diagnosis/B2bInfoExchange, Standardized (yes/no), Current Status
- Each standard has brief overview/introduction, strengths/weaknesses analysis, and other sections. Takes up a lot of space overall, but consistant.
- Lots of analysis of BPEL due to its influential status, due to the fact that it accomplishes so much
- Section 5.8.3 - Context Aware Workflow Management Systems. Very brief duscussion, not really even going into the problems. Of course this discussion was from the viewpoint of BPM and not workflow management.
Posts
0 comments:
Post a Comment