Towards Classification Criteria for Process Fragmentation Techniques
Process fragmentation is the foundation of many state-of-the-art techniques for supporting management, reuse and change of process models. Such techniques vary greatly in terms of which types of processes they are applicable to, what they aim at accomplishing, how they define the resulting process fragments, etc. The comparison, analysis, reuse and selection of the available process fragmentation techniques are hindered by the lack of a common terminology and classification criteria, and by the large discrepancy in the characteristics that are covered when presenting novel fragmentation techniques. This work starts addressing this issue by investigating classification criteria for process fragmentation techniques based on the “seven Ws”, namely Why, What, When, Where, Who, Which, and hoW. The presented classification criteria are applied to some of the process fragmentation approaches available in the literature. In addition to enabling the classification of fragmentation techniques, the classification criteria here presented form a “check-list” for authors of future works in the field of process fragmentation.
Categories: Process improvement techniques and tools
KeywordsProcess Element Structural Constraint Fragmentation Technique Process Fragment BPEL Process
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 4.Nanda, M.G., Chandra, S., Sarkar, V.: Decentralizing execution of composite web services. In: OOPSLA, pp. 170–187. ACM (2004)Google Scholar
- 5.Danylevych, O., Karastoyanova, D., Leymann, F.: Optimal stratification of transactions. In: ICIW, pp. 493–498. IEEE Computer Society (2009)Google Scholar
- 6.Polyvyanyy, A., Smirnov, S., Weske, M.: Process model abstraction: A slider approach. In: EDOC, pp. 325–331. IEEE Computer Society (2008)Google Scholar
- 8.Ma, Z., Leymann, F.: Bpel fragments for modularized reuse in modeling bpel processes. In: Mauri, J.L., Giner, V.C., Tomas, R., Serra, T., Dini, O. (eds.) ICNS, pp. 63–68. IEEE Computer Society (2009)Google Scholar
- 10.Zhai, Y., Su, H., Zhan, S.: A data flow optimization based approach for BPEL processes partition. In: ICEBE, pp. 410–413. IEEE Computer Society (2007)Google Scholar
- 12.Mancioppi, M., Danylevych, O., Papazoglou, M.P., Leymann, F.: A language-agnostic framework for the analysis of the syntactic structure of process fragments. Technischer Bericht Informatik 2010/2007. University of Stuttgart (November 2010)Google Scholar
- 14.Harel, D., Rumpe, B.: Modeling languages: Syntax, semantics and all that stuff (part i: The basic stuff). Technical report, Weizmann Science Press of Israel (2000)Google Scholar
- 16.Kajko-Mattsson, M., Lewis, G.A., Smith, D.B.: A framework for roles for development, evolution and maintenance of soa-based systems. In: SDSOA 2007, p. 7. IEEE Computer Society, Washington, DC (2007)Google Scholar
- 17.Abate, F.R. (ed.): The Oxford Dictionary and Thesaurus. Oxford University Press (1996)Google Scholar
- 18.Papadimitriou, C.H.: Computational complexity. Addison-Wesley (1994)Google Scholar
- 19.Danylevych, O.: CD-JRA-2.2.3: Algorithms and techniques for splitting and merging service compositions. Technical report, S-Cube Consortium (2009)Google Scholar