BPMN 2.0 and the Service Interaction Patterns: Can We Support Them All?

  • Dario CampagnaEmail author
  • Carlos Kavka
  • Luka Onesti
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 555)


The Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) specification version 2.0 represents the amalgamation of best practices within the business modeling community to define the notation and semantics of collaboration diagrams, process diagrams and choreography diagrams. Capturing and managing collaborative processes became a hot topic in the past years, and different choreography modeling languages have emerged. The advancement of such languages let to the definition of the service interaction patterns, a framework for the benchmarking of choreography languages against abstracted forms of representative scenarios. In this paper, we present an assessment of BPMN 2.0 support for service interaction patterns. We evidence the issues that limit the set of supported patterns, and propose enhancements to overcome them.


BPMN 2.0 Collaboration diagrams Service interaction patterns 



The authors thank the reviewers for the very useful comments that have contributed to enhance the paper.


  1. 1.
    Zaha, J.M., Barros, A., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.: Let’s dance: a language for service behavior modeling. In: Meersman, R., Tari, Z. (eds.) OTM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4275, pp. 145–162. Springer, Heidelberg (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    W3C: Web Services Choreography Description Language Version 1.0. (2005)
  3. 3.
    OASIS: Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0. (2007)
  4. 4.
    Barros, A., Dumas, M., Hofstede, A.: Service interaction patterns: towards a reference framework for service-based business process interconnection. Technical report FIT-TR-2005-02, Faculty of IT, Queensland University of Technology (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0 (2011).
  6. 6.
    Barros, A., Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M.: Service interaction patterns. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Benatallah, B., Casati, F., Curbera, F. (eds.) BPM 2005. LNCS, vol. 3649, pp. 302–318. Springer, Heidelberg (2005) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Decker, G., Puhlmann, F.: Extending BPMN for modeling complex choreographies. In: Tari, Z., Meersman, R. (eds.) OTM 2007, Part I. LNCS, vol. 4803, pp. 24–40. Springer, Heidelberg (2007) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cortes-Cornax, M., Dupuy-Chessa, S., Rieu, D., Dumas, M.: Evaluating choreographies in BPMN 2.0 using an extended quality framework. In: Dijkman, R., Hofstetter, J., Koehler, J. (eds.) BPMN 2011. LNBIP, vol. 95, pp. 103–117. Springer, Heidelberg (2011) CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Cortes-Cornax, M., Dupuy-Chessa, S., Rieu, D.: Choreographies in BPMN 2.0: new challenges and open questions. In: Proceedings of the 4th Central-European Workshop on Services and their Composition, ZEUS-2012, vol. 847, pp. 50–57 (2012)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Decker, G., Overdick, H., Zaha, J.M.: On the suitability of WS-CDL for choreography modeling. In: Proceedings of Methoden, Konzepte und Technologien für die Entwicklung von dienstebasierten Informationssystemen, EMISA 2006 (2006)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    OASIS: Web Services Atomic Transaction (WS-AtomicTransaction) Version 1.2 (2009).
  12. 12.
    Hagen, C., Alonso, G.: Exception handling in workflow management systems. IEEE Trans. Softw. Eng. 26, 943–958 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Decker, G., Puhlmann, F., Weske, M.: Formalizing service interactions. In: Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro, J.L., Sheth, A.P. (eds.) BPM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4102, pp. 414–419. Springer, Heidelberg (2006) CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Research and Development DepartmentESTECO SPATriesteItaly

Personalised recommendations