Semantic Annotation for Process Models: - Department of Computer ...
Semantic Annotation for Process Models: - Department of Computer ... Semantic Annotation for Process Models: - Department of Computer ...
104 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND APPLICATION SYSTEM Figure 7.1: Semantic annotation process based on PSAM 7.2 Exemplars Three process models have been chosen in order to explicate how the proposed semantic annotation framework and approach are applied in the process knowledge management of heterogeneous process models. The models are from two different enterprises, and they are created in different modeling languages. The business processes described in those models are from logistics domain. PM A is from enterprise A and it is a purchase order process made in BPMN [12], whilst two other models PM B1 (an item receiving process) and PM B2 (an item delivery process) from logistics department in enterprise B are built in EEML [77]. The models depicts different detail of process knowledge, because two enterprises have different ways of dealing with their business. For example, the delivery process models for enterprise B are relatively simple compared with the delivery processing in enterprise A. However, both of them can achieve the same goals. 7.2.1 Sales logistics process in BPMN The case of enterprise A is taken from [48]. PM A is a big model covering most detail processes of sales logistics. The process model includes the following main activities — Client RFQ processing, Client quotation processing, Standard order processing, Delivery processing, Shipping processing and Bill processing. Four actors are involved in PM A — client, sales department, financial department, and logistics department. Client RFQ processing, Client quotation processing, Standard order processing and Bill processing are mainly carried out by sales department and interacted with client. Delivery processing and Shipping processing are the main activities in the logistics department. Both Delivery processing and Standard order processing need the task credit control in the financial department. Client RFQ processing and client quotation processing In PM A , the client RFQ processing can produce the quotation created from the inquiry or the inquiry is rejected if it is invalid. Analogously, after the client quotation processing, the validity of the quotation is checked. The quotation might be rejected if it is invalid, otherwise it can be referred to by an order in the standard order processing.
Figure 7.2: Sales logistics process of enterprise A in BPMN 7.2. EXEMPLARS 105
- Page 73 and 74: 3.4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION METHODS AN
- Page 75 and 76: 3.4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION METHODS AN
- Page 77 and 78: 3.4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION METHODS AN
- Page 79 and 80: 3.6. SUMMARY 59 In the goal modelin
- Page 81: Part II Design and Application 61
- Page 84 and 85: 64 CHAPTER 4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION F
- Page 86 and 87: 66 CHAPTER 4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION F
- Page 88 and 89: 68 CHAPTER 4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION F
- Page 90 and 91: 70 CHAPTER 4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION F
- Page 92 and 93: 72 CHAPTER 4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION F
- Page 94 and 95: 74 CHAPTER 4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION F
- Page 96 and 97: 76 CHAPTER 4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION F
- Page 98 and 99: 78 CHAPTER 4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION F
- Page 100 and 101: 80 CHAPTER 4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION F
- Page 102 and 103: 82 CHAPTER 4. SEMANTIC ANNOTATION F
- Page 104 and 105: 84 CHAPTER 5. GOAL ANNOTATION proce
- Page 106 and 107: 86 CHAPTER 5. GOAL ANNOTATION in a
- Page 108 and 109: 88 CHAPTER 5. GOAL ANNOTATION • i
- Page 110 and 111: 90 CHAPTER 5. GOAL ANNOTATION 5.5 G
- Page 112 and 113: 92 CHAPTER 5. GOAL ANNOTATION
- Page 114 and 115: 94 CHAPTER 6. PRO-SEAT (PROCESS SEM
- Page 116 and 117: 96 CHAPTER 6. PRO-SEAT (PROCESS SEM
- Page 118 and 119: 98 CHAPTER 6. PRO-SEAT (PROCESS SEM
- Page 120 and 121: 100 CHAPTER 6. PRO-SEAT (PROCESS SE
- Page 122 and 123: 102 CHAPTER 6. PRO-SEAT (PROCESS SE
- Page 126 and 127: 106 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
- Page 128 and 129: 108 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
- Page 130 and 131: 110 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
- Page 132 and 133: 112 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
- Page 134 and 135: 114 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
- Page 136 and 137: 116 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
- Page 138 and 139: 118 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
- Page 140 and 141: 120 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
- Page 142 and 143: 122 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
- Page 144 and 145: 124 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
- Page 146 and 147: 126 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND
- Page 149 and 150: Chapter 8 Quality Evaluation of the
- Page 151 and 152: 8.2. SETTING FOR THE QUALITY EVALUA
- Page 153 and 154: 8.2. SETTING FOR THE QUALITY EVALUA
- Page 155 and 156: 8.3. QUALITY ANALYSIS 135 to those
- Page 157 and 158: 8.3. QUALITY ANALYSIS 137 annotatio
- Page 159 and 160: 8.3. QUALITY ANALYSIS 139 • G1 -
- Page 161 and 162: 8.5. SUMMARY 141 3. Semantic annota
- Page 163 and 164: Chapter 9 Validation of Applicabili
- Page 165 and 166: 9.1. VALIDATION DESIGN 145 - RE3.3
- Page 167 and 168: 9.2. SWRL FORMULATION 147 Table 9.1
- Page 169 and 170: 9.2. SWRL FORMULATION 149 RE3.2 RE3
- Page 171 and 172: 9.3. APPLICABILITY VALIDATION IN AN
- Page 173 and 174: 9.3. APPLICABILITY VALIDATION IN AN
104 CHAPTER 7. EXEMPLAR STUDIES AND APPLICATION SYSTEM<br />
Figure 7.1: <strong>Semantic</strong> annotation process based on PSAM<br />
7.2 Exemplars<br />
Three process models have been chosen in order to explicate how the proposed semantic<br />
annotation framework and approach are applied in the process knowledge management<br />
<strong>of</strong> heterogeneous process models. The models are from two different enterprises, and<br />
they are created in different modeling languages. The business processes described in<br />
those models are from logistics domain. PM A is from enterprise A and it is a purchase<br />
order process made in BPMN [12], whilst two other models PM B1 (an item receiving<br />
process) and PM B2 (an item delivery process) from logistics department in enterprise<br />
B are built in EEML [77]. The models depicts different detail <strong>of</strong> process knowledge,<br />
because two enterprises have different ways <strong>of</strong> dealing with their business. For example,<br />
the delivery process models <strong>for</strong> enterprise B are relatively simple compared with the<br />
delivery processing in enterprise A. However, both <strong>of</strong> them can achieve the same goals.<br />
7.2.1 Sales logistics process in BPMN<br />
The case <strong>of</strong> enterprise A is taken from [48]. PM A is a big model covering most detail<br />
processes <strong>of</strong> sales logistics. The process model includes the following main activities —<br />
Client RFQ processing, Client quotation processing, Standard order processing, Delivery<br />
processing, Shipping processing and Bill processing.<br />
Four actors are involved in PM A — client, sales department, financial department,<br />
and logistics department. Client RFQ processing, Client quotation processing, Standard<br />
order processing and Bill processing are mainly carried out by sales department<br />
and interacted with client. Delivery processing and Shipping processing are the main<br />
activities in the logistics department. Both Delivery processing and Standard order<br />
processing need the task credit control in the financial department.<br />
Client RFQ processing and client quotation processing<br />
In PM A , the client RFQ processing can produce the quotation created from the inquiry<br />
or the inquiry is rejected if it is invalid. Analogously, after the client quotation processing,<br />
the validity <strong>of</strong> the quotation is checked. The quotation might be rejected if it<br />
is invalid, otherwise it can be referred to by an order in the standard order processing.