Shortki Community
September 19, 2020, 12:47:10 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: inShort 1.2.1 for Mac OS. Locations..
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: BPMN 2.0  (Read 3868 times)
Neverpoint
Newbie
*

Karma: +0/-0
Posts: 1


View Profile Email
« on: May 25, 2012, 11:17:42 AM »

Hi,
Do you hear about international de facto BUSINESS PROCESS standart BPMN? Your notation cute but not so clear as BPMN.
Logged
pquadrat
Newbie
*

Karma: +0/-0
Posts: 5


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: May 26, 2012, 12:08:55 AM »

Hi,
Do you hear about international de facto BUSINESS PROCESS standart BPMN? Your notation cute but not so clear as BPMN.

That points out exactly my main wish to the further development of InShort. I've found InShort by searching the AppStore by the keyword "BPMN". I've got to create processes (using BPMN2.0) and I'd need to combine it directly with project management features.
Greetings
Logged
shortki
Administrator
Hero Member
*****

Karma: +16/-0
Posts: 566



View Profile Email
« Reply #2 on: May 26, 2012, 01:28:37 AM »

At one time I found some elements of BPMN inconvenient for use on touch devices. But the main reason is different: I did not want to limit myself with the framework of a single standard, because I see the purpose of the program not in the simple description of workflows, but in combining multiple paradigms of analysis of productive human activity in a single, simple if possible, application. The program includes elements of task control systems, business process building systems and project management systems, which allows you to work with your tasks from different angles. Now the program is relatively simple, which could not be achieved if I supplied it with all the advantages and disadvantages of indirectly used methods and standards. As for me, I tried to take and combine the best of different approaches if possible.

Finally, I'd prefer my own closed formalism to a partial or distorted implementation of a standard — so is more correct with respect to the expectations of a user.
« Last Edit: May 27, 2012, 12:49:19 PM by Argalio » Logged
grumpf
Newbie
*

Karma: +1/-0
Posts: 4


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2012, 09:42:28 AM »

100% agreed.

I usually use inShort for defining AND implementing processes but it does not limit itself to that and allows for much more productive analysis and uses in day to day work.
Whenever I need to formalize a process or issue it in the organization, I just redraw it using the standard tools and all is good.
Otherwise, inShort would just be useful in designing process and would fall short on its ability to actually roll it out and follow it.

My 2 cents. Smiley
Logged
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.20 | SMF © 2006-2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!