Comments on: Highlights from BPMN 2.0: New Event Types http://www.processmodeling.info/posts/highlights-from-bpmn-2-0-new-event-types/ Insightful information on business process modeling from Rick Geneva Mon, 03 May 2010 20:01:28 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Rick Geneva http://www.processmodeling.info/posts/highlights-from-bpmn-2-0-new-event-types/comment-page-1/#comment-90 Rick Geneva Wed, 03 Feb 2010 03:49:15 +0000 http://www.processmodeling.info/?p=347#comment-90 Kim, Thanks for the comment. I have to confess I'm getting a bit behind on my postings. I have to balance writing in this blog with writing in my next book <em>the Microguide to Processs Modeling in BPMN 2.0</em>. I'm pushing hard to get it on the market by early Q2. Initially my writing partner and I thought we'd do just a quick update to the last book. But after digging deep into the BPMN 2.0 spec we realized that we are looking at a total rewrite. Much has changed in the spec, and along with this changes our recommendations and patterns are changing as well. I believe you are correct. I forgot to enclose the escalation path into the dashed subprocess (in-line subprocess). Thank you for pointing this out. I will correct it soon. I could have said that I was planning to do this in a later post and my diagram was deliberate, but you would have called me out on that, wouldn't you? ;-) So maybe the next post in the series will be about subprocess, in-line subprocess, and stand-alone subprocess. This topic needs to be addressed anyway. So thanks for your contribution to my site. Kim,
Thanks for the comment.
I have to confess I’m getting a bit behind on my postings. I have to balance writing in this blog with writing in my next book the Microguide to Processs Modeling in BPMN 2.0. I’m pushing hard to get it on the market by early Q2. Initially my writing partner and I thought we’d do just a quick update to the last book. But after digging deep into the BPMN 2.0 spec we realized that we are looking at a total rewrite. Much has changed in the spec, and along with this changes our recommendations and patterns are changing as well.

I believe you are correct. I forgot to enclose the escalation path into the dashed subprocess (in-line subprocess). Thank you for pointing this out. I will correct it soon. I could have said that I was planning to do this in a later post and my diagram was deliberate, but you would have called me out on that, wouldn’t you? ;-) So maybe the next post in the series will be about subprocess, in-line subprocess, and stand-alone subprocess. This topic needs to be addressed anyway. So thanks for your contribution to my site.

]]> By: Kim Scott http://www.processmodeling.info/posts/highlights-from-bpmn-2-0-new-event-types/comment-page-1/#comment-89 Kim Scott Sat, 30 Jan 2010 01:05:28 +0000 http://www.processmodeling.info/?p=347#comment-89 Hi Rick, Thanks for a helpful site, in as plain a language as one can get with BPMN ;-) It's my understanding from the BPMN 2.0 spec (page 218) that "The Escalation Start Event is only allowed for triggering an in-line Event Sub-Process." If that's the case, then I think in your "Escalation Event Example (non-interrupting) picture above, you need to show the handle escalation within an Event Sub-process. Or do I misunderstand the spec? Hi Rick,

Thanks for a helpful site, in as plain a language as one can get with BPMN ;-)

It’s my understanding from the BPMN 2.0 spec (page 218) that “The Escalation Start Event is only allowed for triggering an in-line Event Sub-Process.” If that’s the case, then I think in your “Escalation Event Example (non-interrupting) picture above, you need to show the handle escalation within an Event Sub-process. Or do I misunderstand the spec?

]]>