BPMN 2.0 is an executable process modeling language. Thus, its relation to BPEL becomes an issue. In this paper, we propose a positioning of both languages, introduce the notion of a “native metamodel”, and emphasize the role of the native metamodel of a process engine for the actual discussion.


Workflow management systems process engines process modeling metamodels standards BPEL BPMN 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0, OASIS (2007), (June 20, 2010)
  2. 2.
    WS-BPEL Extension for People (BPEL4People) Specification Version 1.1, (June 20, 2010)
  3. 3.
    Business Process Model and Notation, OMG 2009 (2009), (June 20, 2010)
  4. 4.
    Kloppmann, M.: BPMN and BPEL – the relationship of two BPM standards, (June 20, 2010)
  5. 5.
    Leymann, F.: BPEL vs BPMN 2.0: Should you care? (June 20, 2010)
  6. 6.
    Leymann, F., Roller, D.: Production Workflow. Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs (2000)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Leymann, F., Karastoyanova, D., Papazoglou, M.: Influential BPM Standards: History and Essence. In: vom Brocke, J., Rosemann, M. (eds.) Handbook on Business Process Management. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Rowley, M.: Which is simpler: BPMN or BPEL, (June 20, 2010)
  9. 9.
    Rowley, M.: BPMN 2.0 with BPEL – the debate is just starting, (June 20, 2010)
  10. 10.
    Silver, B.: BPMN vs BPEL: Are we still debating this? (June 20, 2010)

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Frank Leymann
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Architecture of Application Systems (IAAS)Universität StuttgartStuttgartGermany

Personalised recommendations