Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

UML Activity Diagrams as a Workflow Specification Language

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
≪UML≫ 2001 — The Unified Modeling Language. Modeling Languages, Concepts, and Tools (UML 2001)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNCS,volume 2185))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

If UML activity diagrams are to succeed as a standard in the area of organisational process modeling, they need to compare well to alternative languages such as those provided by commercial Workflow Management Systems. This paper examines the expressiveness and the adequacy of activity diagrams for workflow specification, by systematically evaluating their ability to capture a collection of workflow patterns. This analysis provides insights into the relative strengths and weaknesses of activity diagrams. In particular, it is shown that, given an appropriate clarification of their semantics, activity diagrams are able to capture situations arising in practice, which cannot be captured by most commercial Workflow Management Systems. On the other hand, the study shows that activity diagrams fail to capture some useful situations, thereby suggesting directions for improvement.

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

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. J.Ø. Aagedal and Z. Milosevic. ODP enterprise language: An UML perspective. In Proc. of The 3rd International Conference on Enterprise Distributed Object Computing, Mannheim, Germany, 1999. IEEE Press.

    Google Scholar 

  2. W. M. P. van der Aalst. The application of Petri nets to workflow management. The Journal of Circuits, Systems and Computers, 8(1):21–66, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. W. M. P. van der Aalst, A. P. Barros, A. H. M. ter Hofstede, and B. Kiepuszewski. Advanced workflow patterns. In Proc. of the 5th IFCIS Int. Conference on Cooperative Information Systems, Eilat, Israel, September 2000. Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  4. W. M. P. van der Aalst, A. H. M ter Hofstede, B. Kiepuszewski, and A. Barros. Workflow patterns. Technical Report WP 47, BETA Research Institute, 2000. Accessed March 2001 from http://tmitwww.tm.tue.nl/research/patterns.

  5. E. Börger, A. Cavarra, and E. Riccobene. An ASM semantics for UML activity diagrams. In Proc. of the International Conference on Algebraic Methodologyand Software Technology(AMAST), Iowa City, IO, USA, May 2000. Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  6. F. Casati, S. Ceri, B. Pernici, and G. Pozzi. Conceptual modeling of workflows. In Proc. of the 14th International Object-Oriented and Entity-Relationship Modelling Conference (OOER’95), pages 341–354. Springer Verlag, December 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  7. R. Eshuis and R. Wieringa. A formal semantics for UML activity diagrams-Formalising workflow models. Technical Report CTIT-01-04, University of Twente, Department of Computer Science, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  8. M. Fowler and K. Scott. UML Distilled: A Brief Guide to the Standard Object Modeling Language (Second Edition). Addison Wesley, Readings MA, USA, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  9. D. Harel and A. Naamad. The statemate semantics of statecharts. ACM Transactions on Software Engineering and Methodology, 5(4):293–333, October 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. B. Kiepuszewski, A. H. M. ter Hofstede, and C. Bussler. On structured workflow modelling. In Proc. of the Int. Conference on Advanced Information Systems Engineering (CAiSE), Stockholm, Sweden, June 2000. Springer Verlag.

    Google Scholar 

  11. F. Leymann and D. Roller. Production Workflow: Concepts and Techniques. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ, USA, 2000.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. P. Muth, D. Wodtke, J. Weissenfels, A. K. Dittrich, and G. Weikum. From centralized workflow specification to distributed workflow execution. Journal of Intelligent Information Systems, 10(2), March 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  13. The precise UML group. Home page. http://www.cs.york.ac.uk/puml/.

  14. UML Revision Task Force. OMG Unified Modeling Language Specification, Version 1.4 (final draft). February 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Rumbaugh, I. Jacobson, and G. Booch. The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  16. M. Schader and A. Korthaus. Modeling business processes as part of the BOOSTER approach to business object-oriented systems development based on UML. In Proc. of The Second International Enterprise Distributed Object Computing Workshop (EDOC). IEEE Press, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  17. The Object Management Group. UML Extensions for Workflow Process Definition, RFP-bom/2000-12-11. Accessed on June 2001 from ftp://ftp.omg.org/pub/docs/bom/00-12-11.pdf.

  18. The Workflow Management Coalition. The Workflow Reference Model. http://www.aiim.org/wfmc/standards/docs/tc003v11.pdf, accessed on January 2001.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Cooperative Information Systems Research Centre, Queensland University of Technology, GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, QLD, 4001, Australia

    Marlon Dumas & Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede

Authors
  1. Marlon Dumas
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Arthur H. M. ter Hofstede
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Mathematics and Computer Science Database Systems Group, University of Bremen, P.O. Box 33 04 40, 28334, Bremen, Germany

    Martin Gogolla

  2. Telelogic Technologies, P.O. Box 23 20, Fallbrook, CA, 92088, USA

    Cris Kobryn

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Dumas, M., ter Hofstede, A.H.M. (2001). UML Activity Diagrams as a Workflow Specification Language. In: Gogolla, M., Kobryn, C. (eds) ≪UML≫ 2001 — The Unified Modeling Language. Modeling Languages, Concepts, and Tools. UML 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 2185. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45441-1_7

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-45441-1_7

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42667-7

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-45441-0

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation