Advertisement

Declarative Choreographies for Artifacts

  • Yutian Sun
  • Wei Xu
  • Jianwen Su
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 7636)

Abstract

A choreography models a collaboration among multiple participants. Existing choreography specification languages focus mostly on message sequences and are weak in modeling data shared by participants and used in sequence constraints. They also assume a fixed number of participants and make no distinction between participant type and participant instances. Artifact-centric business process models give equal considerations on modeling both data and control flow of activities. These models provide a solid foundation for choreography specification. This paper makes two contributions. First, we develop a choreography language with four new features: (1) Each participant type is an artifact schema with (a part of) its information model visible to choreography specification. (2) Participant instance level correlations are supported and cardinality constraints on such correlations can be explicitly defined. (3) Messages have data models, both message data and artifact data can be used in specifying choreography constraints. (4) The language is declarative based on a mixture of first order logic and a set of binary operators from DecSerFlow. Second, we develop a realization mechanism and show that a subclass of the choreography specified in our language can always be realized. The mechanism consists of a coordinator running with each artifact instance and a message protocol among participants.

Keywords

Process Instance Cardinality Constraint Message Type Correlation Graph Path Expression 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

References

  1. 1.
    Conversation protocols: a formalism for specification and verification of reactive electronic services. Theo. Comp. Sci. 328(1-2), 19–37 (2004)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bultan, T., Fu, X., Hull, R., Su, J.: Conversation specification: a new approach to design and analysis of e-service composition. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on World Wide Web, WWW (2003)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Busi, N., Gorrieri, R., Guidi, C., Lucchi, R., Zavattaro, G.: Choreography and Orchestration Conformance for System Design. In: Ciancarini, P., Wiklicky, H. (eds.) COORDINATION 2006. LNCS, vol. 4038, pp. 63–81. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carbone, M., Honda, K., Yoshida, N., Milner, R., Brown, G., Ross-Talbot, S.: A theoretical basis of communication-centred concurrent programming (2006)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cattell, R., Barry, D.: The Object Data Standard: ODMG 3.0. Morgan Kaufmann (2000)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Decker, G., Kopp, O., Leymann, F., Weske, M.: BPEL4Chor: Extending BPEL for Modeling Choreographies. In: Proc. 5th Int. Conf. on Web Services, ICWS (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fu, X., Bultan, T., Su, J.: Analysis of interacting BPEL web services. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on World Wide Web, WWW (2004)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Hammer, M., Champy, J.: Reengineering the Corporation: A Menifesto for Business Revolution. Harper Business Press, New York (1993)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Hanson, J., Nandi, P., Kumaran, S.: Conversation support for business process integration. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Enterprise Distributed Object Computing, EDOC (2002)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hull, R., Llirbat, F., Simon, E., Su, J., Dong, G., Kumar, B., Zhou, G.: Declarative Workflows that Support Easy Modification and Dynamic Browsing. In: Proc. Int. Joint Conf. on Work Activities Coordination and Collaboration, WACC (1999)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Katila, R., Mang, P.Y.: Exploiting technological oppurtonities: The timing of collaborations. Research Policy 32(2), 317–332 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kopp, O., Engler, L., van Lessen, T., Leymann, F., Nitzsche, J.: Interaction Choreography Models in BPEL: Choreographies on the Enterprise Service Bus. In: Fleischmann, A., Schmidt, W., Singer, R., Seese, D. (eds.) S-BPM ONE 2010. CCIS, vol. 138, pp. 36–53. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liu, C., Li, Q., Zhao, X.: Challenges and opportunities in collaborative business process management: Overview of recent advances and introduction to the special issue. Information Systems Frontiers 11(3), 201–209 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lohmann, N., Wolf, K.: Artifact-Centric Choreographies. In: Maglio, P.P., Weske, M., Yang, J., Fantinato, M. (eds.) ICSOC 2010. LNCS, vol. 6470, pp. 32–46. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lohmann, N., Wolf, K.: Realizability Is Controllability. In: Laneve, C., Su, J. (eds.) WS-FM 2009. LNCS, vol. 6194, pp. 110–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lohmann, N., Wolf, K.: Decidability Results for Choreography Realization. In: Kappel, G., Maamar, Z., Motahari-Nezhad, H.R. (eds.) ICSOC 2011. LNCS, vol. 7084, pp. 92–107. Springer, Heidelberg (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nigam, A., Caswell, N.S.: Business artifacts: An approach to operational specification. IBM Systems Journal 42(3), 428–445 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Pfitzner, K., Decker, G., Kopp, O., Leymann, F.: Web Service Choreography Configurations for BPMN. In: Di Nitto, E., Ripeanu, M. (eds.) ICSOC 2007. LNCS, vol. 4907, pp. 401–412. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Singh, M.: Information-driven interaction-oriented programming: BSPL, the blindingly simple protocol language. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS), pp. 491–498 (2011)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Singh, M.: LoST: Local state transfer. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Web Services, ICWS (2011)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Su, J., Bultan, T., Fu, X., Zhao, X.: Towards a Theory of Web Service Choreographies. In: Dumas, M., Heckel, R. (eds.) WS-FM 2007. LNCS, vol. 4937, pp. 1–16. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P., Pesic, M.: DecSerFlow: Towards a Truly Declarative Service Flow Language. In: Bravetti, M., Núñez, M., Zavattaro, G. (eds.) WS-FM 2006. LNCS, vol. 4184, pp. 1–23. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Vardi, M., Wolper, P.: Reasoning About Infinite Computations. Inf. Comput. 115(1) (1994)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    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

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yutian Sun
    • 1
  • Wei Xu
    • 2
  • Jianwen Su
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUC Santa BarbaraUSA
  2. 2.School of Computer ScienceFudan UniversityChina

Personalised recommendations