Abstracting Imperative Workflow to Declarative Business Rules

Lex Wedemeijer

Abstract

Large business administrations rely on workflow systems to coordinate their business processes. In practice, workflow models are the blob-and-arc diagrams that outline required activities for dealing with an incoming event. In general however, user understanding is served better by the business rules approach. The Business Rules Manifesto advocates to express in declarative business rules what should be complied with, but to abstract from how to accomplish that by way of procedures. In this paper, we transform the main procedural components of imperative workflows to declarative business rules. The transformation results in two rules that still reflect the procedural nature of workflow, but more abstract than the corresponding workflow model. Once a workflow is transformed to declarative rules, these rules can be merged with other, content-aware business rules or pruned for unnecessary restrictions. The declarative rules and relations may capture business requirements about work processing better than blob-and-arc diagrams of imperative workflows.

References

  1. Aalst W van der, Hofstede A ter, et al., 2003. Workflow Patterns. In: Distributed and Parallel Databases 14(1) p.5-51.
  2. Backhouse R, van der Woude J, 1993. Demonic operators and monotype factors. In: Mathematical Structures in Computer Science 3(4) p.417-433.
  3. Business Rules Manifesto, 2003. At: www.business rulesgroup.org/brmanifesto.htm. Version 2.0. Edited R.G. Ross. Last accessed 24 march 2013.
  4. van Dongen B, Aalst W van der, 2005. A meta model for process mining data. CAiSE Conference Proceedings.
  5. Joosten S, 2007. Deriving Functional Specification from Business Requirements with Ampersand. Available at http://icommas.ou.nl/wikiowi/images/e/e0/
  6. Fahland D, Mendling J, et al., 2009. Declarative versus Imperative Process Modeling Languages: The Issue of Maintainability. In ER BPM.
  7. Hofstede A ter, Aalst W van der, et al., 2003. Business Process Management: A Survey. In: Business Process Management. M. Weske, Springer Notes 2678.
  8. Maddux R, 2006. Relation Algebras. Studies in Logic and the Foundations of Mathematics, vol. 150. Elsevier Science.
  9. Maggi FM, Westergaard M, et al., 2011. Runtime Verification of LTL-Based Declarative Process Models. In: RV 2011, Khurshid and Sen (editors) LNCS 7186, p.131-146.
  10. McKemmish S, Acland G, et al., 2006. Describing records in context in the continuum: the Australian Recordkeeping Metadata Schema Archivaria 1(48).
  11. McNeile A, Simons N, 2006. Protocol modelling: A modelling approach that supports reusable behaviour abstractions. In: Software and Systems Modeling 5(1) p.91-107.
  12. McNeile A, Roubtsova E, 2008. CSP parallel composition of aspect models. In: Proceedings of the 2008 AOSD workshop on Aspect-oriented modeling. Brussels, Belgium, ACM p.13-18.
  13. Russell N, Hofstede A ter, et al., 2006. Workflow ControlFlow Patterns: A Revised View. At: www.workflowpatterns.com/patterns
  14. Russell N, Aalst W van der, et al., 2005. Workflow Resource Patterns: Identification, representation and tool support. Advanced Information Systems Engineering, Springer.
  15. Wedemeijer L, 2012. A comparison of two business rules engineering approaches. In: BMSD 2012, p.113-121
  16. Witt G, 2012. Writing Effective Business Rules. Morgan Kaufmann. ISBN 978012-385051-5.
  17. Workflow Management Coalition, 1999. Terminology & Glossary. Tech.Report WFMC-TC-1011 issue 3.0.
Download


Paper Citation


in Harvard Style

Wedemeijer L. (2013). Abstracting Imperative Workflow to Declarative Business Rules . In Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design - Volume 1: BMSD, ISBN 978-989-8565-56-3, pages 74-85. DOI: 10.5220/0004774200740085


in Bibtex Style

@conference{bmsd13,
author={Lex Wedemeijer},
title={Abstracting Imperative Workflow to Declarative Business Rules},
booktitle={Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design - Volume 1: BMSD,},
year={2013},
pages={74-85},
publisher={SciTePress},
organization={INSTICC},
doi={10.5220/0004774200740085},
isbn={978-989-8565-56-3},
}


in EndNote Style

TY - CONF
JO - Proceedings of the Third International Symposium on Business Modeling and Software Design - Volume 1: BMSD,
TI - Abstracting Imperative Workflow to Declarative Business Rules
SN - 978-989-8565-56-3
AU - Wedemeijer L.
PY - 2013
SP - 74
EP - 85
DO - 10.5220/0004774200740085