Siena: From PowerPoint to Web App in 5 Minutes

Cohn, David L.; Dhoolia, Pankaj; Heath, Fenno F.; Pinel, Florian; Vergo, John

doi:10.1007/978-3-540-89652-4_63

Cited by 32 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cohn and Hull [7] illustrated that IBM has used BELA tool to map an artifact-centric process model into an executable model (e.g., BPEL) that can run on IBM's WebSphere Process Server. Cohn et al [10] proposed a system called Sienna to support execution of Finite-State-Machine lifecycles for artifacts. Barcelona [18] supports the execution of artifact models with Guard-Stage-Milestone (GSM).…”

Section: Related Work Discussion and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Workflow Execution Platform for Collaborative Artifact-Centric Business Processes

Yongchareon

Ngamakeur

Liu

et al. 2014

On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2014 Workshops

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.To execute an artifact-centric process model, current workflow execution approaches require it to be converted to some existing executable language (e.g., BPEL) in order to run on a workflow system. We argue that the transformation can incur losses of information and degrade traceability. In this paper, we proposed and developed a workflow execution platform that directly executes a collaborative (i.e., inter-organizational) workflow specification of artifact-centric business processes without performing model conversion.

show abstract

Section: Related Work Discussion and Conclusionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Workflow Execution Platform for Collaborative Artifact-Centric Business Processes

Yongchareon

Ngamakeur

Liu

et al. 2014

On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems: OTM 2014 Workshops

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“… Activity-flow oriented, when the activities and their predefined sequences are used at firsthand, but the data that must be processed are perceived as second-class citizen [1,2,17];  Document oriented, when it is important to finish some document using a strict authorization mechanism, document partitioning and templates [18]- [20];  Case handling, when it is important to resolve a case without necessarily specifying the order of activities, obtaining some minimum amount of data or making predefined number of decisions [21], [22];  Business artifact-centric (a special case of data-centric paradigm), which combines and models both data (information model) and process (lifecycle model) aspects as a single unit [16], [23]- [28]. The first paradigm is quite mature already and implemented in many enterprise ISs.…”

Section: Cross-enterprise Collaborative Business Processesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Authors suggest using two kinds of management systems: procedural and declarative. The imperative (Siena for FSM models [28] and Barcelona for GSM models [24]) systems are similar to the WMS. It is passive, since allows querying and retrieving artifact information, invoking business events and notifying about the pre-subscribed events [26].…”

Section: Business Artifact-centric Paradigmmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enabling Support of Collaborative Cross-enterprise Business Processes for Legacy ERP Systems.

Alksnis

Asnina

Kirikova

et al. 2015

CSIMQ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. In order to create innovative business products, share knowledge between people and businesses, or increase the control and quality of services, more and more often enterprise business processes involve in collaborations by delegating or providing some pieces of work to other enterprises. Necessity to cooperate in the cross-enterprise setting leads to Collaborative Business Processes (CBPs). The difference between CBPs and Business Processes (BPs) is in the decentralized coordination, flexible backward recovery, participants notification about the state, efficient adaptability to changes, presence of multiple information systems, and individual authorization settings. In the paper we consider a specific case of CBPs where multiple collaborating partners use Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) system of the same vendor. The vendor can see (e.g., monitor) the changes of data elements, but does not have explicit process awareness in the ERP system to support flow of activities in the crossenterprise setting. The paper also discusses different settings of cross-enterprise CBP and shows simplified enterprise models behind the vendor possibilities to positively impact collaborative processes. The restrictions of the vendor are implicit information flows in BP, diversity of ERP integrations with third party Information Systems (IS), the lack of mechanisms for monitoring BP instances, backward recovery, user notification about the current state and tasks, and inability to make explicit changes in customers' ISs.

show abstract

“…In the artifact model considered here the services are applied in a sequential fashion (there is no true concurrency). IBM has developed Siena [23], a tool for compiling artifactbased procedural specifications into code supporting the corresponding business process. Its opensource descendant, the BizArtifact suite [10], has just been announced.…”

Section: Business Artifactsmentioning

confidence: 99%