![](bga.png)
5 CONCLUSIONS
In this paper, we investigated BPMN 2.0 collabora-
tion diagram support for the service interaction pat-
terns (Barros et al., 2005b), and proposed a set of en-
hancements to broaden it.
We assessed that BPMN 2.0 directly supports nine
of the thirteen patterns, i.e., the three Single Transmis-
sion Bilateral Interaction Patterns, Racing Incoming
Messages, One-to-many Send, One-from-many Re-
ceive, Multi-responses, Request with Referral, and
Relayed Request. Standard BPMN 2.0 supports Con-
tingent Requests when we choose to disallow late re-
sponses altogether. The BPMN 1.0 extensions pre-
sented in (Decker and Puhlmann, 2007) are not nec-
essary in BPMN 2.0, since it supports multiple par-
ticipants and message correlation out of the box, and
since reference passing (Decker and Puhlmann, 2007)
can be modeled by using data objects/data inputs/data
outputs, messages, and context-based correlation.
We proposed three enhancements to broaden
BPMN 2.0 support for service interaction patterns.
The first is an extension called initiator that together
with a modification of the key-based message corre-
lation semantics allows the representation of the One-
to-many Send/Receive pattern. The second enhance-
ment consists in the use of message queues to sup-
port the Contingent requests pattern when we choose
to accept the first response even if it is late and stop
outstanding requests. The last enhancement is a set
of workarounds for Atomic Multicast Notification.
Thanks to these enhancements, BPMN 2.0 supports
eleven of the thirteen patterns.
Future work will include the study of BPMN 2.0
extensions to further improve the Contingent request
pattern support. We also plan to evaluate BPMN 2.0
as a whole, comparing and combining our results with
the ones presented in (Cortes-Cornax et al., 2011).
Moreover, we consider a π-calculus formalization of
the BPMN 2.0 semantics as an important future work.
Such a formalization would make it possible for a
formal validation of the proposed pattern represen-
tations, since a π-calculus formalization of the ser-
vice interaction patterns has already been presented
in (Decker et al., 2006b).
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The authors thank the reviewers for the very useful
comments that have contributed to enhance the paper.
REFERENCES
Barros, A., Dumas, M., and Hofstede, A. (2005a). Ser-
vice Interaction Patterns. In Business Process Man-
agement, volume 3649 of Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, pages 302–318. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Barros, A., Dumas, M., and Hofstede, A. (2005b). Ser-
vice Interaction Patterns: Towards a Reference Frame-
work for Service-based Business Process Interconnec-
tion. Technical Report FIT-TR-2005-02, Faculty of IT,
Queensland University of Technology.
Cortes-Cornax, M., Dupuy-Chessa, S., and Rieu, D. (2012).
Choreographies in BPMN 2.0: New Challenges and
Open Questions. In Proceedings of the 4th Central-
European Workshop on Services and their Compo-
sition, ZEUS-2012, volume 847 of CEUR Workshop
Proceedings, pages 50–57.
Cortes-Cornax, M., Dupuy-Chessa, S., Rieu, D., and Du-
mas, M. (2011). Evaluating Choreographies in BPMN
2.0 Using an Extended Quality Framework. In Busi-
ness Process Model and Notation, volume 95 of Lec-
ture Notes in Business Information Processing, pages
103–117. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Decker, G., Overdick, H., and Zaha, J. M. (2006a). On the
Suitability of WS-CDL for Choreography Modeling.
In Proceedings of Methoden, Konzepte und Technolo-
gien f¨ur die Entwicklung von dienstebasierten Infor-
mationssystemen, EMISA 2006.
Decker, G. and Puhlmann, F. (2007). Extending BPMN for
Modeling Complex Choreographies. In Proceedings
of the 2007 OTM Confederated international confer-
ence on On the move to meaningful internet systems:
CoopIS, DOA, ODBASE, GADA, and IS - Volume Part
I, OTM’07, pages 24–40. Springer-Verlag.
Decker, G., Puhlmann, F., and Weske, M. (2006b). Formal-
izing Service Interactions. In Dustdar, S., Fiadeiro,
J., and Sheth, A. P., editors, Business Process Man-
agement, volume 4102 of Lecture Notes in Computer
Science, pages 414–419. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
Hagen, C. and Alonso, G. (2000). Exception handling in
workflow management systems. IEEE Transaction on
Software Engineering, 26(10):943–958.
OASIS (2007). Web Services Business Process Ex-
ecution Language Version 2.0. http://docs.oasis-
open.org/wsbpel/2.0/OS/wsbpel-v2.0-OS.html.
OASIS (2009). Web Services Atomic Transaction (WS-
AtomicTransaction) Version 1.2. http://docs.oasis-
open.org/ws-tx/wstx-wsat-1.2-spec-os/wstx-wsat-
1.2-spec-os.html.
OMG (2011). Business Process Model
and Notation (BPMN) Version 2.0.
http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/2.0.
W3C (2005). Web Services Choreography Description Lan-
guage Version 1.0. http://www.w3.org/TR/ws-cdl-10/.
Zaha, J., Barros, A., Dumas, M., and Hofstede, A. (2006).
Let’s Dance: A Language for Service Behavior Mod-
eling. In On the Move to Meaningful Internet Systems
2006: CoopIS, DOA, GADA, and ODBASE, volume
4275 of Lecture Notes in Computer Science, pages
145–162. Springer Berlin Heidelberg.
ICSOFT-EA2014-9thInternationalConferenceonSoftwareEngineeringandApplications
208