1 Arne J. Berre 1 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics CBSE and workflow-based composition Arne-Jørgen Berre, SINTEF CBSEnet, Cyprus, September 26 th, 2003 Based on position statement for ECOOP’2003 WS12 “Third International Workshop Composition Languages” July 22 nd, 2003

2 Arne J. Berre 2 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics COMBINE Component Centre Components implementations Component specifications Documentation Enterprise Repository TransformationService ITrS Model Transformer Execution Environment Runtime components. Workflow support Modeling toolProgram tool Model transformation Models profiles, business, requirements, architecture, platform Define and execute transformations, code generation Engineer & build component code Repository interface Repositoty & Process CC description Integrated Environment Process Support Web-based Workflow support IRep XMI/OBJ Comp. Valida tor Prog WFXML XMI/Code IDE IBrow HTML CodeXMI

3 Arne J. Berre 3 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics COMBINE MDA Approach Workflow Engine

4 Arne J. Berre 4 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Component Centre Parts Components implementations Component specifications Documentation Enterprise Repository (Adaptive) TransformationService ITrS Model Transformer J2EE JBOSS Execution Env. Runtime components. (OpenSource) Objecteering (Softeam) Eclipse Program IDE UMT (SINTEF) Models profiles, business, requirements, architecture, platform Define and execute transformations, code generation Engineer & build component code (OpenSource) Repository Web interface ( Adaptive) Integrated Environment Process Support Web-based (OpenIT) Micro-Workflow Engine IRep XMI/OBJ Comp. Validator (Open Group) Prog WFXML XMI/Code ECLIPSE IDE (OpemSource) IBrow HTML CodeXMI (INESC)

5 Arne J. Berre 5 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics

6 Arne J. Berre 6 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics OpenGIS Web Services and Components

7 Arne J. Berre 7 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics ACE-GIS Project example MDA PIM Plastform Independent Model In XMI Service Infrastructure Registry & Repository Catalogue & Services UML Graphical notation Information model (WSDL/XSD) Semantic Interoperability mapper tool Service model (ws:WSDL +) FlowComposition model (ws:WSFL +) XMI-representation FlowComposition model Information model Service model UMT Transfor mation Toolkit MDA PSM Platform Specific Model: Web Services, ebXML, J2EE/EJB,... GI Services EC Services Standard Registry Repository Composition Services Service Creation Environment Model mapper Existing application FlowComposition model Information model Service model New Application & service Service interface Conformance Testing tool Flow Composition tool UML tool

8 Arne J. Berre 8 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Workflow analysis

9 Arne J. Berre 9 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics

10 Arne J. Berre 10 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics

11 Arne J. Berre 11 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics

12 Arne J. Berre 12 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics UML Model Transformation tool XMI   XMI code generation model transformations

13 Arne J. Berre 13 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics <WorkflowDefinition xmlns=" id="W-example" name="application integration workflow example" xmlns:xsi=" xsi:schemaLocation=" <ConditionalProcedure id="P3" name="Check for 1" condition="((List)choices).contains(new Integer(1));"> <PrimitiveProcedure id="P4" name="Do action for 1" domainObject="GetRoadMap"/> <ConditionalProcedure id="P5" name="Check for 2" condition="((List)choices).contains(new Integer(2));"> <PrimitiveProcedure id="P6" name="Do action for 2" domainObject="GetLandMap"/> <PrimitiveProcedure id="P7" name="Combine the information into one map" domainObject="CombineMaps"/>

14 Arne J. Berre 14 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Patterns for “Flow”, “Choreography”, “Composition” and “Orchestration” Ref. artikkel “Don’t go with the flow”

15 Arne J. Berre 15 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Comparison of “Flow” “Standards” 1/2

16 Arne J. Berre 16 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Comparison of “Flow” “Standards” 2/2

17 Arne J. Berre 17 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Discussion point What are similarities/differences, and advantages/disadvantages between: Workflow languages vs (Web) Service orchestration/choreography languages vs Scripting languages ---- and Component Composition languages ? (theory/practice) ADLs Agent-based languages Conclusion from ECOOP’2003 WS12 “Third International Workshop Composition Languages” -> The various approaches, (Workflow, Web service choreography, Scripting, Component composition) need to be related and compared.

18 Arne J. Berre 18 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Issues Workflow, orchestration, composition – What are similarities and differences with respect to problem/solution Describe resources and artifacts give: Problem in handling loops (state handling) Create a new instance of the process (problem of resources and artifacts) – difficult then to merge Putting together versus composition and/or orchestration Activity view versus Component collaboration/composition view (UML for EDOC) – also for non functional aspects ? Relationship to ADL, UML 2.0 (Port-Connector)

19 Arne J. Berre 19 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Issues (II) Dynamic discovery of services, reconfigurability, match QoS requirements Component deployment solutions (Workshop on Deployment – colocated ICSE May-2004) Upgrade system, reconfiguration languages, C2 language (David Garlan, CMU, strict hierarchy of components) CBSE Symposium colocated ICSE May-2004, predictable assembly International CB Programming workshop, ECOOP 2004, June 14-17, Oslo, WICSA (Software Architecture) colocated

20 Arne J. Berre 20 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Issues III Killer application for Composition languages ? Be problem oriented rather than solution oriented ? First – what are the advantages offered: Separation of concern, explicit configuration; flexibility, adaptability, easier to understand for users – let users change (ref. SAP), (no recursion/looping) Embedded domain (Field devices), Agent-oriented applications PICOLA – language as a research vehicle What is difficult to express ? Interoperability – Describe workflow model, import into execution engine, From Business model to XPDL,

21 Arne J. Berre 21 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Issues IV Mobility ? Rel.to QoS requirements, code mobility (viruses/worms) ?, device mobility, user mobility,

22 Arne J. Berre 22 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Issues Agree on Ontology for QoS Different interpretations of terms, top down vs bottom up ISO 9126 – Sofware quality UML profile for QoS Specification of context ?

23 Arne J. Berre 23 SINTEF Telecom and Informatics Relevant links COMBINE ACE-GIS MDA UML Location-based services & components/GIS CBSEnet