I'm unable to link a task with a pool boundary using Message flow!

The objects in your example are lanes and not pools (lanes always exist within a pool - labeled here as "Role 1" and "Role 2"). Since the 2.0 spec distinguishes between a BPMN process and a collaboration, the pool object only exist in a collaboration diagram. Did you try a collaboration diagram before?

Yeah I chose the process diagram before, it worked now. Thanks Roland.

Hey Roland,

I have used the process collaboration diagrams, the problem is i'm unable to link a call activity to a process collaboration diagram. Any advise?

You should be able to assign a BPMN Process model, right? This is the expected behavior when you look into the spec (chapter 10.2.6; highlights by me):



"A Call Activity identifies a point in the Process where a global Process or a Global Task is used. The Call Activity acts as a ‘wrapper’ for the invocation of a global Process or Global Task within the execution. The activation of a call Activity results in the transfer of control to the called global Process or Global Task."

This is a change in the 2.0 spec where Collaborations and Processes are two different diagram types.

I just started using BPMN 2.0. What I wanna do is link a call activity to a subprocess. I draw the subprocess using the process collaboration diagram because I needed to use a pool symbol. Is there any way to link to a process collaboration subprocess rather than using the call activity symbol?

I recommend that you buy Thomas Allweyer's book "BPMN 2.0" for a good introduction in the standard if you like to avoid to read the 500 page spec.

There are 2 types of call activities (task and subprocess), but you are not allowed to use a collaboration for a subprocess. The reason behind this is, that your subprocess is already part of a pool - even if you don't draw it (and maybe a lane if you are using those). Therefore you should be consistent and avoid putting your SP in a pool/lane and have other pools/lanes in the assigned SP model.

If I understand you correctly, you want to hand over control to another process (using a "process interface" that we use in EPC, but does not exist in BPMN). Maybe the discussion here helps a little bit: http://www.ariscommunity.com/users/pmcclean18/2010-03-25-bpmn-20-how-do-i-link-models-sequence-and-allow-users-navigate.

Roland,

I have a similar question. Can you have a message conenction between a task in a subprocess to another pool? Tried but not working. The message connection can only exist between the boundary of a subprocess to the boundary of another pool but NOT between a task in a subprocess to another pool.

Sometimes I find BPMN 2.0 becomes more handicapped than 1.2 :-(

Any help is apprecited.

Max, there is some discussion elsewhere here about this as well and there are advocates who think that should be possible.

IMHO a subprocess (which is either expanded or, when collapsed, shown in an assigned additional model) is a self-contained process that can run on its own and can be -in case of reusage- be transformed into a call subprocess that always has to run in the same fashion.

This self-containment can be seen in the prescribed usage of a generic start event in the subprocess but also in the way how different outcomes of the subprocess should be represented. In another discussion I showed this graphic and I think that this is the proper way to model it ("testing" the different outcomes after a subprocess at a following gateway and one or many outcomes can then be connected to another pool). This will preserve the integrity of the subprocess.

So, to make a long story short, I think the way ARIS works is the way you should model.