BPMN and UML 2 Actors

[Scott Lindner]

How do you relate UML 2 Actors in a Use Case model to BPMN activities?  I understand there is no standard way to do so yet.

If I understand correctly.  BPMN Pools are the same as Actors in UML.  In EA 6.1 w/ the BPMN addin, I have created my actor models, and created my activities in a BPMN diagram.  I then create pools for each actor, and set the Instance Classifier for each Pool to be the UML Actor.  This seems to make sense.  It shows the name of the Actor in the BPMN Pool.

I'm not comfortable this is an appropriate solution.  When i open the UML Actor, there are no relationships to the BPMN Activities.  One of the powers of Sparx EA is how linking this objects together allows for greater tracability.  Seeing this is making me uncomfortable that my approach for using BPMN and UML may not be appropriate.  Does anyone have any working examples to provide?

Cheers,
Scott

[«Midnight»]

Scott,

I don't think anyone has really come up with anything close to a standard here. What you are doing seems to make sense, at least for now.

As to the relationships not showing up, this may be due to EA not accepting them as 'standard' UML, since the BPMN stuff is not likely to map cleanly to elements that the to which actors would normally be linked. A similar problem could also occur at the other (BPMN) end of the association.

Try looking at the Project / Model Validation / Configure dialog. Clear the BPMN rules box. Also try changing the Tools / Options / Diagram box for Strict UML syntax. Please let me know if these have any effect.

David

[Scott Lindner]

I tried that and didn't notice anything different.  I tried a few things to make sure.  I will experiment a bit more tonight.

I understand there are no standards for this situation.  I was hoping Sparx EA might have a way of making them play nicely together just like the rest of the modelling in the tool.  If you have other thoughts to try I'd be happy to try them.

Cheers,
Scott

[«Midnight»]

You could always use a stereotyped association. You'd have to come up with your own stereotype here, but it might allow the link to be seen by the rest of EA.

You'd have to work some magic with transformations, generation, etc. Still, it might get you a bit further.

[Scott Lindner]

Good suggestion.

I'm not that savvy with EA yet but I do understand the principal of what you're saying.

I did have a minor break through.  I was able to link a UML Actor to a BPMN Activity using the BPMN MessageFlow or SequenceFlow.  The association then shows up in the UML Actor.

The only trouble I have with this is logically it doesn't make sense.  In fact, I'm starting to question my objective as I'm thinking more about this.  The actor doesn't send the activity a message, nor does the actor do something and then the activity does something.  The Flow concept from Actor to Activity doesn't make sense.  The actor participates in that activity.. or does it.  But does nothing to it.  Hmm.....

I need to take a step back and think about my objectives.

Thanks for the dialog on this.  Hopefully others that are more familiar with the two standards will jump in that might provide a different perspective on this.

Scott