Advertisement

High Assurance BPEL Process Models

  • Mark Robinson
  • Hui Shen
  • Jianwei Niu
Chapter

Abstract

An increasing number of software applications and business processes are relying upon the use of web services to achieve their requirements. This is due in part to the use of standardized composition languages like the Business Process Execution Language (BPEL). BPEL allows the process designer to compose a procedural workflow from an arbitrary number of available web services and supplemental “programming-like” activities (e.g., assigning values to variables). Such composition languages naturally bring concerns of reliability, consistency, and durability, let alone safety and security. Thus, there is a need for formal specification and analysis of BPEL compositions for high assurance satisfaction. We propose the use of Unified Modeling Language (UML) sequence diagrams as a means for analysis of BPEL process consistency and demonstrate our technique with two examples.

Keywords

Unify Modeling Language Sequence Diagram Execution Trace Business Process Execution Language Business Process Execution Language Process 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    O’Brien L, Merson P, Bass L (2007) Quality Attributes for Service-Oriented Architectures. International Workshop on Systems Development in SOA EnvironmentsGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kontogiannis K, Lewis GA, Smith DB et al (2007) The Landscape of Service-Oriented Systems: A Research Perspective. International Workshop on Systems Development in SOA EnvironmentsGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Sarna-Starosta B, Stirewalt REK, Dillon LK (2007) Contracts and Middleware for Safe SOA Applications. International Workshop on Systems Development in SOA EnvironmentsGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zheng Y, Krause P (2007) Automata Semantics and Analysis of BPEL. Digital EcoSystems and Technologies Conference 147-152Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Zheng Y, Zhou J, Krause P (2007) A Model Checking based Test Case Generation Framework for Web Services. Fourth International Conference on Information Technology 715-722Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ye C, Cheung SC, Chan WK (2006) Publishing and composition of atomicity-equivalent services for B2B collaboration. Proceedings of the 28th international Conference on Software Engineering 351-360Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Li Q, Zhu H, He J (2008) Towards the Service Composition Through Buses. High Assurance Systems Engineering Symposium 441-444Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Chu W, Qian D (2008) Architecture Centric System Design for Supporting Reconfiguration of Service Oriented Systems. High Assurance Systems Engineering Symposium 414-423Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dun H, Xu H, Wang L (2008) Transformation of BPEL Processes to Petri Nets. Theoretical Aspects of Software Engineering 166-173Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Laneve C, Zavattaro G (2005) Foundations of web transactions. Proceedings of Foundations of Software Science and Computation Structures 282-298Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Foster H, Uchitel S, Magee J et al (2006) LTSA-WS: A Tool for Model-Based Verification of Web Service Compositions and Choreography. International Conference on Software Engineering 771-774Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Foster H, Uchitel S, Magee J et al (2006) Model-based Verification of Web Service Compositions. 18th IEEE International Conference on Automated Software EngineeringGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Foster H, Uchitel S, Magee J et al (2004) Compatibility Verification for Web Service Choreography. 3rd IEEE International Conference on Web ServicesGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Foster H (2003) Mapping BPEL4WS to FSP, Technical Report. Imperial CollegeGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Akkiraju R, Flaxer D, Chang H et al (2001) A Framework for Facilitating Dynamic e-Business Via Web Services. OOPSLA 2001 -Workshop on Object-Oriented Web ServicesGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Fu X, Bultan T, Su J (2004) WSAT: A tool for Formal Analysis of Web Services. 16th International Conference on Computer Aided VerificationGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nakajima S (2002) Model-Checking Verification for Reliable Web Service. Workshop on Object-Oriented Web ServicesGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rumbaugh J, Jacobon I, Booch G (2004) The Unified Modeling Laguage Reference Manual Second Edition. Addison-Wesley, United StatesGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Object Management Group (2007) Unified Modeling Language: Super-structure v2.1.2.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Whittle J, Schumann J (2000) Generating statechart designs from scenarios. International Conference on Software Engineering 314-323Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Uchitel S, Kramer J, Maggee J (2003) Synthesis of behavioral models from scenarios. IEEE Transactions on Software Engineering 99-115Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Arlow J, Neustadt I (2008) UML 2 and the Unified Process, Second Edition. Addison-Wesley, United StatesGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    OASIS (2007) Web Services Business Process Execution Language Version 2.0.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag US 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mark Robinson
    • 1
  • Hui Shen
    • 1
  • Jianwei Niu
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceUniversity of Texas at San AntonioSan Antonio

Personalised recommendations