Check out the camunda web-based modelers on github (BPMN2.0 and DMN1.1). I use those with my own elixir/phoenix backend. Camunda has an opensource backend interpreter also for these. Written in java.
Zalando and Goldman Sachs seem to be enthousiast (as I mentioned before on this forum)
StefanHoutzager
0
dimitarvp
Everything that is more or less an executable flowchart diagram looks to be hijacked for such purposes, even if the tech itself can be helpful.
IMO that’s a relatively good way to go about it – has to be a language whose macros yield AST, like Elixir or a LISP dialect.
0
StefanHoutzager
Everything? Isn’t that a wild guess?
There is BPMN and DMN already, open standards with many years of research behind them. And understandable for business experts. But you want to reinvent the wheel? No, worse even, develop a proprietary DSL?
2
dimitarvp
Of course it is a wild guess. I dipped my toes in the area long ago and decided I don’t like the preliminary red signs, as discussed above. And I already admitted I might be wrong. But I won’t be dipping further to find out – I got scared away by the first wave of solutions and I am unwilling to try again. Call me biased again 
but it is what it is.
As @jeremyjh stated, tech like this attracts expensive consultants that are dying to do a vendor lock-in in the company.
I have read in Excel-related threads in HackerNews how programmers trained accountants and analysts to use a mini-DSL they devised with great success.
So IMO there’s something else here – maybe the BPMN tech is too big and maybe intimidating for many (not gonna say all)? And maybe a small proprietary DSL is less confusing to a lot of business people, much like Excel is complex but still feels graspable?
Not sure. But it’s one of the possibilities.
0
peerreynders
That in itself is a business opportunity.
Those new to BPMN understandably find it overwhelming. There are flow objects, connecting objects, swim lanes, and artifacts. And that’s just the categories within the notation. Overall, there are over 40 different elements, each with rules about when it can and cannot be used.
(In contrast, our quick list of workflow diagramming elements in the Business Process Analysis course contains the 5 elements that are used by the majority of practicing business analysts.)
It’s invaluable to document and capture your business processes for communication purposes.
I find that it is usually the detail necessary for the automation aspect that can get into the way of making the information the stakeholders find relevant readily available (which often needs to be solved with even more automation). Of course without automation, process model documents can become stale rather quickly as updates can easily be missed.
1
StefanHoutzager
It might be that the elixir language is overwhelming and intimidating for many (not gonna say all) also. I think it is even a lot more intimidating than bpmn. I leave the search for quotes to you.
What exactly is that business opportunity Peer? If you mean the proprietary DSL suggested: that can grow out by business needs to a monster that is much more horrifying than bpmn. It might be wiser to start with a bpmn subset. The open source gui modelers are there already, available on github, menu-items can be removed.
It’s a pity that mostly opponents speak up on this forum, and none of them has much knowledge of what is criticized. I have had private conversations with elixir devs that had another attitude (and then suddely this brightball - a frequent poster here - comments pop up on hacker news), who knows who else here maybe just has no taste to speak up. But it is what it is.
0
peerreynders
The way I understood that quote was to train people to formalize their business processes by focusing on diagramming (i.e. visualizing) with a BPMN subset without any intention towards automation but simply as a basis for communication, i.e. as artefacts to judge their progress on the path of continuous improvement.
and then suddenly this brightball
That quote was so general it could have just referred to capturing business processes with a standardized notation to improve visibility and discourse - it wasn’t clear whether it actually referred to “Low Code BPM” and its inherent automation.
A lot of people groan about UML. But UML is just a standardized notation that can be used to visualize valuable information. But it can’t guarantee:
- That the most valuable information is put front and centre and depicted in the most appropriate manner.
- Everybody will understand it.
- Some tools (e.g. Rational ClearCase) won’t get people to hate it.
1
StefanHoutzager
Not what I understood, see at least
This is less general: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16288486
0
jeremyjh
I attended a five-day training on IBM’s toolset in 2008. Then I watched a project throw money into a burning barrel for a year and deliver next to nothing. Am I an expert? No…but this is not cheaply acquired skepticism.
1
MrDoops
Are there good examples of approaches that instead of using BPMN to generate code to run, code is written and a process diagram is generated from an analysis of the code? I expect the variability in code expression would pose issues. The trade-off is it requires a coder to implement, but it would solve the communication and “stale” problems. I guess in a space like Elixir I’m wary of generated code implementing concurrency well; Salesforce’s declarative tools have issues with scalability and implicit implementation details, it can be hard to anticipate bugs or know when something will fail.
Another idea in this space is event storming. It might be easier to guide our token Excel-technical user through some kind of guided Event Storming session to define the process through events, commands, entity definitions, etc. It could be that this DDD modeling exercise is a simpler set of vocabulary to learn than the BPMN lexicon. The question is can this approach specify with enough granularity to generate capable code?
0