Skip to main content

Realizing Business Processes with ECA Rules: Benefits, Challenges, Limits

  • Conference paper
Principles and Practice of Semantic Web Reasoning (PPSWR 2006)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNISA,volume 4187))

  • 427 Accesses

Abstract

Event-Condition-Action (ECA) rules offer a flexible, adaptive, and modular approach to realizing business processes. This article discusses the use of ECA rules for describing business processes in an executable manner. It investigates the benefits one hopes to derive from using ECA rules and presents the challenges in realizing business processes. These constitute a list of requirements for an (executable) business process description language, and we take them as a basis to investigate suitability of the concrete ECA rule language XChange in realizing a business process from the EU-Rent Case Study.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Davenport, T.H.: Process Innovation: Reengineering Work through Information Technology. Havard Business School Press, Boston (1993)

    Google Scholar 

  2. The Business Rules Group: Defining business rules – what are they really? (2000), available at: www.businessrulesgroup.org

  3. World Wide Web Consortium: Rule interchange format working group charter (2005), See: www.w3.org/2005/rules/wg/charter

  4. Bonatti, P.A., Olmedilla, D.: Driving and monitoring provisional trust negotiation with metapolicies. In: IEEE Int. Workshop on Policies for Distributed Systems and Networks. IEEE Comp. Soc., Los Alamitos (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Bry, F., Schwertel, U.: REWERSE – reasoning on the Web. AgentLink News (15) (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Andrews, T., et al.: Business process execution language for web services version 1.1 (2003), available at: www.ibm.com/developerworks/library/ws-bpel

  7. Carter, B.M., Lin, J.Y.C., Orlowska, M.E.: Customizing internal activity behaviour for flexible process enforcement. In: Proc. Australasian Database Conference. Australian Computer Society (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  8. van der Aalst, W.M.P., ter Hofstede, A.H.M., Kiepuszewski, B., Barros, A.P.: Workflow patterns. Distributed and Parallel Databases 14(1) (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  9. White, S.A.: Introduction to BPMN. Technical report, Object Management Group (OMG) (2004), available at: http://www.bpmn.org

  10. Hall, J.: Business rules boot camp. Tutorial at the European Business Rules Conference (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Wagner, G.: How to design a general rule markup language? In: Proc. Workshop on XML Technologien für das Semantic Web - XSW, LNI, GI, vol. 14 (2002)

    Google Scholar 

  12. Bry, F., Marchiori, M.: Ten theses on logic languages for the Semantic Web. In: Fages, F., Soliman, S. (eds.) PPSWR 2005. LNCS, vol. 3703, pp. 42–49. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  13. EU-Rent Case Study (2005), http://www.eurobizrules.org/ebrc2005/eurentcs/eurent.htm

  14. European Business Rules Conference (2005), http://www.eurobizrules.org

  15. Business Rules Group (2005), http://www.businessrulesgroup.org

  16. Gudgin, M., et al.: SOAP version 1.2. W3C recommendation, World Wide Web Consortium (2003)

    Google Scholar 

  17. Schaffert, S., Bry, F.: Querying the Web reconsidered: A practical introduction to Xcerpt. In: Proc.Extreme Markup Languages (2004)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Bailey, J., Bry, F., Eckert, M., Pătrânjan, P.L.: Flavours of XChange, a rule-based reactive language for the (Semantic) Web. In: Adi, A., Stoutenburg, S., Tabet, S. (eds.) RuleML 2005. LNCS, vol. 3791, pp. 187–192. Springer, Heidelberg (2005)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  19. Bry, F., Eckert, M., Pătrânjan, P.L.: Reactivity on the Web: Paradigms and applications of the language XChange. J. of Web Engineering 5(1), 3–24 (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  20. Knolmayer, G., Endl, R., Pfahrer, M.: Modeling processes and workflows by business rules. In: van der Aalst, W.M.P., Desel, J., Oberweis, A. (eds.) Business Process Management. LNCS, vol. 1806, p. 16. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Bry, F., Eckert, M.: Twelve theses on reactive rules for the Web. In: Proc. Workshop Reactivity on the Web at Int. Conf. on Extending Database Technology. LNCS, vol. 3268. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  22. Brambilla, M., Ceri, S., Comai, S., Tziviskou, C.: Exception handling in workflow-driven web applications. In: Proc. Int. Conference on World Wide Web. ACM, New York (2005)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Bry, F., Eckert, M., Pătrânjan, PL., Romanenko, I. (2006). Realizing Business Processes with ECA Rules: Benefits, Challenges, Limits. In: Alferes, J.J., Bailey, J., May, W., Schwertel, U. (eds) Principles and Practice of Semantic Web Reasoning. PPSWR 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 4187. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11853107_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11853107_4

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-39586-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-39587-4

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics