You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@struts.apache.org by Jonathan Asbell <ja...@i-2000.com> on 2001/07/24 02:24:02 UTC
Workflow impasse? New ideas.
Hello all. I just got back and was reading the e-mails about workflows. By the tone and lack of dialog I think that we are not sure how we really want to design workflows still. So lets have more discussion on the subject. When its clearer we will better know what we want to do.
Here are some ideas I thought could break down the problem a little more. I was thinking that a workflow can be described in the following ways:
1) It has a specific order
2) It DOES'NT having a specific order
3) It has a combination of tasks, some of which need to be executed in order, and others that do not
4) All of its tasks must be finished at the end
5) It May be made up of other worklflows
Therefore, you would get a workflow with the characteristics you want. At the end you would make sure all tasks have been done in order it to be considered a completed workflow. For items that need order we can use the struts config file to put an entry in for
<workflows>
<flow name="createAccount" class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.Account_WF">
<step ordered="yes" number="1" class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.AccountPersonal_ITEM">
<step ordered="yes" number="2" class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.AccountCreditCheck_ITEM">
<step ordered="no" class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.AccountDisplayTotal_ITEM">
</flow>
</workflows>
anyone want to add....
Re: Workflow impasse? New ideas.
Posted by Michael Schneider <mi...@sdrc.com>.
A nice way of looking at workflows is
EVTX diagrams/methods
Where
E - Entry Criteria to start process activity
V - Validation Methods (inspection methods)
T - Tasks in the process activity
X - Exit Criteria to say task is complete
You can define your process by Listing the process activites
(Each with an EVTX datum), then linking the process tasks together
This has worked well for Modeling Software Process and Manufacturing
Processes,
Any thoughts on this?
Jonathan Asbell wrote:
> Hello all. I just got back and was reading the e-mails about
> workflows. By the tone and lack of dialog I think that we are not
> sure how we really want to design workflows still. So lets have more
> discussion on the subject. When its clearer we will better know what
> we want to do. Here are some ideas I thought could break down the
> problem a little more. I was thinking that a workflow can be
> described in the following ways: 1) It has a specific order2) It
> DOES'NT having a specific order3) It has a combination of tasks, some
> of which need to be executed in order, and others that do not4) All of
> its tasks must be finished at the end5) It May be made up of other
> worklflows Therefore, you would get a workflow with the
> characteristics you want. At the end you would make sure all tasks
> have been done in order it to be considered a completed workflow. For
> items that need order we can use the struts config file to put an
> entry in for<workflows> <flow name="createAccount"
> class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.Account_WF"> <step
> ordered="yes" number="1"
> class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.AccountPersonal_ITEM">
> <step ordered="yes" number="2"
> class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.AccountCreditCheck_ITEM">
> <step ordered="no"
> class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.AccountDisplayTotal_ITEM">
> </flow></workflows> anyone want to add....
Re: Workflow impasse? New ideas.
Posted by suhas <su...@techmas.hcltech.com>.
In Java Pet Store Application there is some mention about workflow .Why can't we just follow it ?
Here is what they do ? from requestMapping.xml ( similar to our struts-config.xml input mapping)
<request-mappings>
<screen definitions .../>
<url-mapping url="/verifysignin" screen="SIGN_IN_SUCCESS" useRequestHandler="true" useFlowHandler="true">
<request-handler-class>com.sun.j2ee.blueprints.petstore.control.web.handlers.SigninHandler</request-handler-class>
<flow-handler class="com.sun.j2ee.blueprints.petstore.control.web.handlers.SigninFlowHandler">
<handler-result result="2" screen="SIGN_IN_ERROR"/>
<handler-result result="1" screen="SIGN_IN_SUCCESS"/>
</flow-handler>
</url-mapping>
</request-mapping.
Then use the DOM parser to parse it . I have not seen how in struts the work-flow is handled ? Or is it similar to above :-)
Suhas
----- Original Message -----
From: Jonathan Asbell
To: struts-user@jakarta.apache.org
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2001 5:54 AM
Subject: Workflow impasse? New ideas.
Hello all. I just got back and was reading the e-mails about workflows. By the tone and lack of dialog I think that we are not sure how we really want to design workflows still. So lets have more discussion on the subject. When its clearer we will better know what we want to do.
Here are some ideas I thought could break down the problem a little more. I was thinking that a workflow can be described in the following ways:
1) It has a specific order
2) It DOES'NT having a specific order
3) It has a combination of tasks, some of which need to be executed in order, and others that do not
4) All of its tasks must be finished at the end
5) It May be made up of other worklflows
Therefore, you would get a workflow with the characteristics you want. At the end you would make sure all tasks have been done in order it to be considered a completed workflow. For items that need order we can use the struts config file to put an entry in for
<workflows>
<flow name="createAccount" class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.Account_WF">
<step ordered="yes" number="1" class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.AccountPersonal_ITEM">
<step ordered="yes" number="2" class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.AccountCreditCheck_ITEM">
<step ordered="no" class="com.brooksbrothers.workflows.AccountDisplayTotal_ITEM">
</flow>
</workflows>
anyone want to add....
Re: Workflow impasse? New ideas.
Posted by Ted Husted <hu...@apache.org>.
As it stands, the Struts ActionMappings are already very nearly
workflows. To close the loop, I believe we only need a few things.
1) A way to declare prerequesite actions.
2) A way to bookmark an Action, so the workflows can be rentrant.
3) A way to declare the html:form Action path at runtime.
Given these capabilities, and a simple support structure, a set of
ActionMappings can be linked together to form a robust workflow that can
reuse input forms.
Matthias Bauer has code for (1),
<
http://www.mail-archive.com/struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org/msg01685.html
>
and Martin Cooper has a plan for ActionRequests that sound good for (2).
<
http://www.mail-archive.com/struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org/msg02398.html
>
As for (3), I have a hack in place now,
<
http://www.mail-archive.com/struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org/msg02374.html
>
but was waiting on Martin's ActionRequests before thinking seriously
about integrating the mechanism into the framework.
Craig is also reviewing some "airplane notes"
<
http://www.mail-archive.com/struts-dev@jakarta.apache.org/msg02439.html
>
he has about a scripting mechanism that might also be used for
workflows.
In the end, I think a workflow will look like another set of
ActionMappings, and the Action will just contain some extra logic for
returning the correct ActionForward if the flow gets out of synch.
In the meantime, I do like the ideas that are coming up on this thread.
> Jonathan Asbell wrote:
>
> Hello all. I just got back and was reading the e-mails about
> workflows. By the tone and lack of dialog I think that we are not
> sure how we really want to design workflows still. So lets have more
> discussion on the subject. When its clearer we will better know what
> we want to do.