Behavior-Consistent Composition of Business Processes from Internal and External Services

  • Günter Preuner
  • Michael Schrefl
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2784)


E-business processes are typically developed by composing internal processes and external processes offered by service providers. Whereas e-service integration has received considerable interest recently, the relationship between the behavior of the composite process and the behavior of the constituting service processes has not yet been thoroughly investigated.

It is natural to expect that the behaviors of the composite process and the service processes are related as follows: (1) The composite process synchronizes the execution of activities from different service processes. (2) The composite process provides a complete overview of the service processes in that business transactions can be tracked (“observed”) over their entire life time across all services. (3) If an activity can be invoked according to the composite process, it can be successfully invoked in the respective service process. (4) The description of the composite process, focusing on coordination, abstracts from local details as far as possible.

Based on these requirements, the paper introduces formal correctness criteria for business-process composition and sketches an accompanying algorithm that determines a “behavior-consistent” composition.


Business Process Service Composition Service Process Business Transaction Business Object 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Bichler, P., Preuner, G., Schrefl, M.: Workflow Transparency. In: Olivé, À., Pastor, J.A. (eds.) CAiSE 1997. LNCS, vol. 1250, Springer, Heidelberg (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Eyal, A., Milo, T.: Integrating and customizing heterogeneous e-commerce applications. VLDB Journal 10(1), 16–38 (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Guth, V., Lenz, K., Oberweis, A.: Distributed Workflow Execution based on Fragmentation of Petri Nets. In: Proc. IFIP World Computer Congress (1998)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    IBM. Web Services Flow Language (WSFL 1.0) (May 2001) Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kafeza, E., Chiu, D.K.W., Kafeza, I.: View-based Contracts in an E-service Cross-Organizational Workflow Environment. In: Casati, F., Georgakopoulos, D., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) TES 2001. LNCS, vol. 2193, p. 74. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kappel, G., Schrefl, M.: Object/Behavior Diagrams. In: Proc. Int. Conf. on Data Engineering (1991)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Klischewski, R., Wetzel, I.: Modeling Serviceflow. In: Proc. Information Systems Technology and its Applications, German Informatics Society (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Krithivasan, R., Helal, A.: BizBuilder — An E-services Framework Targeted for Internet Workflow. In: Casati, F., Georgakopoulos, D., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) TES 2001. LNCS, vol. 2193, p. 89. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lenz, K., Oberweis, A.: Modeling Intergorganizational Workflows with XML Nets. In: Proc. 34th Hawaii Int. Conf. on System Sciences (2001)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mecella, M., Pernici, B.: Designing wrapper components for e-services in integrating heterogeneous systems. VLDB Journal 10(1), 2–15 (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mecella, M., Pernici, B., Craca, P.: Compatibility of e-Services in a Cooperative Multi-Platform Environment. In: Casati, F., Georgakopoulos, D., Shan, M.-C. (eds.) TES 2001. LNCS, vol. 2193, p. 44. Springer, Heidelberg (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Preuner, G., Conrad, S., Schrefl, M.: View Integration of behavior in objectoriented databases. Data & Knowledge Engineering 36(2), 153–183 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Preuner, G., Schrefl, M.: Behavior-consistent Composition of Business Processes from Internal and External Services. Technical Report 02.02, Universität Linz, Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik (September 2002)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rumbaugh, J., Jacobson, I., Booch, G.: The Unified Modeling Language Reference Manual. Addison-Wesley, Reading (1999)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schrefl, M., Stumptner, M.: Behavior Consistent Refinement of Object Life Cycles. In: Embley, D.W. (ed.) ER 1997. LNCS, vol. 1331. Springer, Heidelberg (1997)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schrefl, M., Stumptner, M.: On the Design of Behavior Consistent Specialization of Object Life Cycles in OBD and UML. In: Papazoglou, M., Spaccapietra, S., Tari, Z. (eds.) Advances in Object-Oriented Data Modeling. MIT Press, Cambridge (2000)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Schrefl, M., Stumptner, M.: Behavior Consistent Specialization of Object Life Cycles. ACM Trans. Software Engineering and Methodology 11(1), 92–148 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Shegalov, G., Gillmann, M., Weikum, G.: XML-enabled workflow management for e-services across heterogeneous platforms. VLDB Journal 10(1), 91–103 (2001)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Stumptner, M., Schrefl, M.: Behavior Consistent Inheritance in UML. In: Laender, A.H.F., Liddle, S.W., Storey, V.C. (eds.) ER 2000. LNCS, vol. 1920, pp. 527–542. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Thatte, S.: XLANG: Web Services for Business Process Design. Microsoft, Redmond (2001)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    van der Aalst, W., Barthelmess, P., Ellis, C., Wainer, J.: Proclets: A Framework for Lightweight Interacting Workflow Processes. Int. Journal of Cooperative Information Systems 10(4), 443–482 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    van der Aalst, W., Verbeek, H., Kumar, A.: XRL/Woflan: Verification and Extensibility of an XML/Petri-net based language for interorganizational workflows. In: Proc. 6th Conf. on Information Systems and Technology (2001)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Günter Preuner
    • 1
  • Michael Schrefl
    • 2
  1. 1.Institut für Wirtschaftsinformatik, Data & Knowledge EngineeringUniversität LinzAustria
  2. 2.School of Computer and Information ScienceUniversity of South AustraliaMawson LakesAustralia

Personalised recommendations