[CASHeW-s-Editor] RE: UML Activity Diagrams paper...

[Barry Norton]

Worth reading, but please bear in mind that we would use a *subset* of
the activity diagrams language, i.e. only that which is consistent with
OWL-S.

Cheers,

Barry



> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden
[mailto:address@hidden
> On Behalf Of R Bhagdev
> Sent: Thursday, December 09, 2004 10:20 AM
> To: address@hidden; CASheW-S Mailing List
> Subject: UML Activity Diagrams paper...
> 
> I think this paper is worth looking at at this point of time.  I have
not
> read
> it fully, but just the conclusion.  It lists out strong points as well
as
> weak
> points of Activity Diagrams as workflow constructs.
> 
> UML Activity Diagrams
> 
> as a Workow Speci cation Language
> 
> http://tmitwww.tm.tue.nl/research/patterns/download/uml_patterns.pdf
> 
> - Ravish Bhagdev