Recker, J., Rosemann, M., Indulska, M., Green, P.: Business Process Modeling - a Comparative Analysis. Hitchman, S.: The Details of Conceptual Modelling Notations are Important - A Comparison of Relationship Normative Language. Journal of the American Statistical Association 80(391), 499–512 (1985) Kosslyn, S.M.: Graphics and Human Information Processing: A Review of Five Books. Cognitive Science 11, 65–99 (1987)īritton, C., Jones, S.: The Untrained Eye: How Languages for Software Specification Support Understanding by Untrained Users.
Larkin, J., Simon, H.: Why a Diagram Is (Sometimes) Worth Ten Thousand Words. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 35, 756–779 (2009) Moody, D.L.: The “Physics” of Notations: Towards a Scientific Basis for Constructing Visual Notations in Software Engineering. OMG: Business Process Model and Notation (BPMN) Specification 2.0 V0.9.15.
This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This work can be considered a first step towards making BPMN 2.0’s visual notation more cognitively effective. We demonstrate and illustrate this by looking at BPMN 2.0 through the lens of the Physics of Notations, a collection of evidence-based principles that together form a theory of notation design.
This results in a number of suboptimal language design decisions that may impede effective model-mediated communication between stakeholders. Although the current language specification recognises the importance of defining a visual notation carefully, it does so by relying on common sense, intuition and emulation of common practices, rather than by adopting a rigorous scientific approach. BPMN 2.0 is an OMG standard and one of the leading process modelling notations.
0 kommentar(er)
