1 Arne J. Berre 1 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics CBSE and workflow-based composition Arne-Jørgen Berre, SINTEF [email protected]CBSEnet, Cyprus, September 26 th , 2003 Based on position statement for ECOOP’2003 WS12 “Third International Workshop Composition Languages” July 22 nd , 2003
CBSE and workflow-based composition. Arne-J ørgen Berre, SINTEF [email protected] CBSEnet, Cyprus, September 26 th , 2003 Based on position statement for ECOOP’2003 WS12 “Third International Workshop Composition Languages” July 22 nd , 2003. IDE. Integrated Environment. Repository - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Welcome message from author
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1Arne J. Berre 1SINTEF Telecom and Informatics
CBSE and workflow-based composition CBSE and workflow-based composition
<PrimitiveProcedure id="P6" name="Do action for 2"
domainObject="GetLandMap"/>
</ConditionalProcedure>
</JoinProcedure>
<PrimitiveProcedure id="P7" name="Combine the information into one map"
domainObject="CombineMaps"/>
</SequenceProcedure>
</WorkflowDefinition>
14Arne J. Berre 14SINTEF Telecom and Informatics
Patterns for “Flow”, “Choreography”,
“Composition” and “Orchestration”
Patterns for “Flow”, “Choreography”,
“Composition” and “Orchestration”
Pattern
Sequence
Parallel Split
Synchronization
Exclusive Choice
Simple Merge
Multi Choice
Synchronizing Merge
Multi Merge
Pattern
Discriminator
Arbitrary Cycles
Implicit Termination
MI without
Synchronization
MI with a Priori Design
Time Knowledge
MI with a Priori Runtime
Knowledge
MI without a Priori
Runtime Knowledge
Ref. artikkel“Don’t go with the flow”http://tmitwww.tm.tue.nl/research/patterns/ieeewebflow.pdf
15Arne J. Berre 15SINTEF Telecom and Informatics
Comparison of “Flow” “Standards” 1/2
Comparison of “Flow” “Standards” 1/2
Pattern XPDL UML BPEL XLANG WSFL BPML
Sequence + + + + + +
Parallel Split + + + + + +
Synchronization + + + + + +
Exclusive Choice + + + + + +
Simple Merge + + + + + +
Multi Choice + - + - + -
Synchronizing Merge - - + - + -
Multi Merge - - - - - +/ -
16Arne J. Berre 16SINTEF Telecom and Informatics
Comparison of “Flow” “Standards” 2/2
Comparison of “Flow” “Standards” 2/2
Pattern XPDL UML BPEL XLANG WSFL BPML
Discriminator - - - - - -
Arbitrary Cycles + - - - - -
Implicit Termination + - + - + +
MI without
Synchronization - - + + + +
MI with a Priori Design
Time Knowledge + + + + + +
MI with a Priori Runtime
Knowledge - + - - - -
MI without a Priori
Runtime Knowledge - - - - - -
Deferred Choice - + + + - +Interleaved Parallel
Routing - - +/ - - - -
Milestone - - - - - -
Cancel Activity - + + + + +
Cancel Case - + + + + +
17Arne J. Berre 17SINTEF Telecom and Informatics
Discussion pointDiscussion point
• What are similarities/differences,• and advantages/disadvantages between:
• Workflow languages vs• (Web) Service orchestration/choreography languages• vs• Scripting languages
• ---- and Component Composition languages ? (theory/practice)• ADLs• Agent-based languages• Conclusion from ECOOP’2003 WS12 • “Third International Workshop Composition Languages” • -> The various approaches, (Workflow, Web service choreography,
Scripting, Component composition) need to be related and compared.
18Arne J. Berre 18SINTEF Telecom and Informatics
Issues
Issues
• Workflow, orchestration, composition – What are similarities and differences with respect to problem/solution
• Describe resources and artifacts give:
• Problem in handling loops (state handling)
• Create a new instance of the process (problem of resources and artifacts) – difficult then to merge
• Putting together versus composition and/or orchestration
• Activity view versus Component collaboration/composition view (UML for EDOC) – also for non functional aspects ?
• Relationship to ADL , UML 2.0 (Port-Connector)
19Arne J. Berre 19SINTEF Telecom and Informatics
Issues (II)
Issues (II)
• Dynamic discovery of services, reconfigurability, match QoS requirements
• International CB Programming workshop, ECOOP 2004, June 14-17, Oslo, WICSA (Software Architecture) colocated
20Arne J. Berre 20SINTEF Telecom and Informatics
Issues III
Issues III
• Killer application for Composition languages ? Be problem oriented rather than solution oriented ?
• First – what are the advantages offered: Separation of concern, explicit configuration; flexibility, adaptability, easier to understand for users – let users change (ref. SAP), (no recursion/looping)