Is there an equivalent to XOR/OR/AND gateways in inShort?

[boddicker]

I like the logic of split/join gateways in BPMN 2. I know inShort doesn't provide support for BPMN 2, but how would I express the same concept? For example, sometimes a process will need to wait until three conditions are met and collected before the process can proceed (and gateway). Is there a way to express this?

[shortki]

Links entering into an object follow the AND logic, it means that the object is activated when all the links are active, but through the mechanism of alternative ports of activation, you can configure the activation according to the OR logic. With the help of multiple objects you can implement any combination of the rules AND/OR. I recommend to learn more about the activation ports in the Guide or Help (just press the button with the question mark in the card of properties of a link).

XOR rule does not correspond to the principle of the irreversibility of the start: when one input becomes true and activates the process, the subsequent activation of the second input, in theory, should interrupt the process started earlier, this is incorrect. The project methodology assumes that after the start of the process the initial conditions do not change, at least, everyone strives for that, as the change of requirements after the start of a project is a sure way to a possible failure.

As for the XNOR rule (as well as negation), these rules do not comply with the principle of causality, that is why they are not allowed in the causal systems. The principle of causality states that an event cannot take place if no other events happened before that, i.e. there is no dependent events occurring on their own. The XNOR rule assumes that an event may be true if the two incoming events are false, this is a violation of causality, so the XNOR rule cannot be reproduced in the application.

[Rottenbind]

Can you elaborate on how to do a logical "OR"?  It sounds simple, but I can't seem to get it working.  I've got two common processes linked to a trigger.  Both links are set to Activation Port A (with a diamond icon).  I have the trigger setting to "Activated by Port" and have "Port A" chosen.  In execution mode, the trigger does not become active until both common processes are complete, just like the default behavior (AND behavior).  I would expect that completion of either of the two processes would cause Port A to become active, and activate the trigger (OR behavior).

[Rottenbind]

Replying to my own question:-p   I think I figured it out, but I'm not sure that I understand the logic of it.  It appear that if both incoming links have "different" ports of activation, it will work as an OR gate.  Its a different way of thinking than the way I was thinking before.

What I still don't get is that you have a choice of which activation port to use on the trigger where the signals are merged. It appears that you can choose any port and it will function as an OR gate.  I'm not sure what the point is in being able to select an activation port here then.

In the way that I was expecting it to work, I thought that the activation port on the trigger was the one that was being monitored, and both incoming processes would be set to use this port, so either of them could cause it to become active.  Apparently it doesn't work this way... both incoming ports need to be different to get OR functionality.  Seems odd and I'm probably missing something.

[Rottenbind]

Replying to my own question again 
I've been studying that encapsulation example in the manual quite a bit (the one where you defuse a bomb!).  It's making more sense to me now.

[shortki]

I am glad you sorted out quickly by yourself.
Trigger of the activation port is a very specific object and is only indirectly related to the implementation of the OR logic, it seems to have confused you a bit at first.