Author Topic: Bending the rules re BPMN2 partnerEntities for messageFlow traceability  (Read 956 times)

Mr Stuff

  • EA User
  • **
  • Posts: 64
  • Karma: +0/-0
    • View Profile
In order to trace message flows to systems already defined in our repository as Archimate (Application Component) elements, I thought I would use the partnerEntity tagged value of Pool. I can set the partnerEntity to an Archimate Application Component GUID with a script and no BPMN validation errors arise. Is there any reason why I should not (known issues, risks?) do this?

If that can be done, could I also set the tagged value "resources" of a BPMN send/receive activity to be an Application Component GUID - and then report on system-system message flows by iterating over message flows and identifying the source/targets from either Pool partnerEntity or Activity Resource?




  • EA Guru
  • *****
  • Posts: 9822
  • Karma: +190/-154
  • I'm no guru at all
    • View Profile
The refGuid TVs in BPMN are usually constraint to certain stereotypes. (I can't tell which since I'm not an BPMN expert.) You see that by clicking the ellipsis that you are offered only certain element. Using a script you can bypass that and set any element GUID instead. The validation is not perfect and I suppose that they don't check the GUIDs for pointing to the correct stereotypes. Might be worth a bug report if that's the case.