<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns:p="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:powerpoint" xmlns:a="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:access" xmlns:dt="uuid:C2F41010-65B3-11d1-A29F-00AA00C14882" xmlns:s="uuid:BDC6E3F0-6DA3-11d1-A2A3-00AA00C14882" xmlns:rs="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:rowset" xmlns:z="#RowsetSchema" xmlns:b="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:publisher" xmlns:ss="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:spreadsheet" xmlns:c="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:component:spreadsheet" xmlns:odc="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:odc" xmlns:oa="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:activation" xmlns:html="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40" xmlns:q="http://schemas.xmlsoap.org/soap/envelope/" xmlns:rtc="http://microsoft.com/officenet/conferencing" xmlns:D="DAV:" xmlns:Repl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/repl/" xmlns:mt="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/meetings/" xmlns:x2="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/excel/2003/xml" xmlns:ppda="http://www.passport.com/NameSpace.xsd" xmlns:ois="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/ois/" xmlns:dir="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/directory/" xmlns:ds="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#" xmlns:dsp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/dsp" xmlns:udc="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" xmlns:sub="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/2002/1/alerts/" xmlns:ec="http://www.w3.org/2001/04/xmlenc#" xmlns:sp="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/" xmlns:sps="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:udcs="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/soap" xmlns:udcxf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/xmlfile" xmlns:udcp2p="http://schemas.microsoft.com/data/udc/parttopart" xmlns:wf="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/workflow/" xmlns:dsss="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig-setup" xmlns:dssi="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2006/digsig" xmlns:mdssi="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/digital-signature" xmlns:mver="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/markup-compatibility/2006" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns:mrels="http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/relationships" xmlns:spwp="http://microsoft.com/sharepoint/webpartpages" xmlns:ex12t="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/types" xmlns:ex12m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/exchange/services/2006/messages" xmlns:pptsl="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/soap/SlideLibrary/" xmlns:spsl="http://microsoft.com/webservices/SharePointPortalServer/PublishedLinksService" xmlns:Z="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:" xmlns:st="" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;}
@page Section1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang=EN-AU link=blue vlink=purple>
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Hi IK, <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>WDA for BPM UIs is not supported in NW BPM 7.2. We expect
that it is likely to be supported in 7.3 – but you will not see official
confirmation of 7.3 features until close to the ramp-up date as per our usual
practice. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>It’s only the UIs that have to be developed. The flowchart is
in BPMN notation and background steps are Enterprise Service (WSDL) calls.
Also there are wizards to help build the WDJ UIs in a basic format. My
experience suggests that while you will want a WDJ person to help beautify the
WDJ application, it’s certainly possible for a Workflow developer to do the
rest without any Java knowledge. It does help to be SOA savvy though as you
likely to want to create your own web services – which means understanding
outside-in development using PI. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Regards,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'>Jocelyn <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div style='border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm'>
<p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:
"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu
[mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Ibrahim<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, 10 May 2010 4:12 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> SAP Workflow Users' Group<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: This Group<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Dear Jocelyn,<br>
Thanks for the update, I would like to whether Webdynpro ABAP is
supported by BPM, If not the it would be difficult for ABAP/Workflow
consultants to develop the interface. we have to always rely on the WDJ guys.
Please advice.<br>
<br>
Regards<br>
IK<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 7:15 AM, Dart, Jocelyn <<a
href="mailto:jocelyn.dart@sap.com">jocelyn.dart@sap.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Hi Mike,<br>
Just adding the SAP employee perspective... and by the way I'm Product Lead for
NW BPM in ANZ Field Services this year.<br>
<br>
I agree currently NW BPM and Workflow should be considered as complementary.
Mainly due to existing business content and solution maturity issues.
Also yes Workflow will not be going away anytime soon.<br>
It is however possible to use NW BPM instead of Workflow for a new site that
does not use workflow at all for scenarios that we would previously have done
in workflow (e.g. purchase order approval) - provided current
limitations/restrictions are understood and this is happening at some sites.<br>
<br>
A lot of the concepts and issues around process handling are the same.<br>
We currently have a BPM forum in SDN, so the question for this forum is: as BPM
usage grows do you want to start covering that area as well or just stick with
traditional workflow?<br>
<br>
I can't give any official details on future releases yet but I can confirm
generally that we are expecting some better integration options between
workflow and NW BPM when we get to 7.3 on both the backend and NW BPM platforms
most likely around business event management and calling of ABAP-based
applications. We also expect some sort of import for 7.3 although I
don't expect we will be translating from workflow to BPM or vice versa - more
likely import of a model from business process modelling applications. I
don't expect workflow to be further developed - although I agree BPMN is easier
to work with and enables better cross communication between business and IT.<br>
<br>
If anyone has any specific questions I'm happy to provide what information I
can. There are trial versions available on SDN if you want to have a play
with NW BPM, or try out the pre-built Simple Sample Applications on the
ESWorkplace site.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
Jocelyn<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal>________________________________________<br>
From: <a href="mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</a> [<a
href="mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</a>] On Behalf Of
Mike Pokraka [<a href="mailto:wug@workflowconnections.com">wug@workflowconnections.com</a>]<br>
Sent: Thursday, 6 May 2010 1:42 AM<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>To: SAP Workflow Users' Group<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class=MsoNormal>Subject: Re: This Group<br>
<br>
Hi Mike,<br>
<br>
You'll be pleased to know that I don't consider your situation that<br>
peculiar, most of my projects have been great supporters of workflow.<br>
<br>
Unfortunately it's a question of commercial incentive for SAP to devote<br>
significant resources to the workflow engine, so it's easy to arrive at<br>
the "if it ain't broke..." conclusion when asking how further
development<br>
is going to increase licensing revenue. For that matter, I don't see a<br>
major MM or SD revision coming out any time soon either.<br>
<br>
What I do know is that SAP may not place great strategic value on<br>
Workflow, but do still consider it of functional value. Of course if you<br>
mention BOR there'll be contempt because... well you know my opinion on<br>
it. Workflow however remains a recommended technology under SAP's Best<br>
Built Apps initiative, now in it's third iteration<br>
(<a href="http://bestbuiltapps.sap.com" target="_blank">http://bestbuiltapps.sap.com</a>
- page 18-19), and they are committed to<br>
supporting it for a long time.<br>
<br>
NetWeaver BPM is not designed as a replacement for workflow, but a<br>
complementary product. NWBPM has breadth and WF had depth. NWBPM still has<br>
significant shortcomings - a lot of them - and some won't ever go away<br>
simply due to the opposing nature of the designs. For this reason I don't<br>
think WF is dead for a long while yet. I see at least 5-10 years of<br>
significant WF development in the majority of organisations. A great many<br>
aren't even using the UWL yet.<br>
<br>
What would be great is something in between the two, and one way would be<br>
a shift towards BPMN compliance/compatibility in the ABAP workflow engine.<br>
In theory not a ridiculous undertaking as the SAP-WF design is not too far<br>
off BPMN rules (close enough that I advocate BPMN as a documentation<br>
standard for workflows). As NWBPM is BPMN-based, it would make things a<br>
little more portable between the two engines. In dreamland that would<br>
allow people to design a process independent of either and deploy<br>
different parts of it on whichever engine is most suitable.<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Mike<br>
<br>
<br>
develop it further, because the amount of effort required to impact<br>
=licensing revenue?<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On Tue, May 4, 2010 9:45 pm, Madgambler wrote:<br>
> Much as I'd like to agree with you Susan, I see and hear plenty to the<br>
> contrary from SAP's own consultants every day here in the UK. And it<br>
> disappoints me because I see a lot of untapped potential being<br>
> overlooked because: a) it's considered to be 'old' so it's not being<br>
> taught in Walldorf/Mumbai, b) it's entirely dependent on ABAP to<br>
> function and c) SAP are trying to abandon their traditional Gui for<br>
> Web UI / BOL / GenIL at an alarming rate.<br>
><br>
> Granted our situation is a bit peculiar because of the size of the<br>
> system and the (over)dependence on Workflow here but I feel I have to<br>
> regularly defend Workflow as a 'workhorse' on a daily basis. And to be<br>
> honest I'm starting to regard it more and more as an obsolete dead-end<br>
> as that seems to be the overwhelming attitude of anyone coming in from<br>
> the CRM and PI worlds. I don't really believe that it is dead by the<br>
> way but I do think the bell is tolling faintly.<br>
><br>
> Start talking about BOR to a CRM Consultant these days and you'll hear<br>
> a guffaw of contempt followed swiftly by a dismissal about it being<br>
> yesterday's tool with a limited future. Mention SBWP to the latest<br>
> breed of Developers and half won't have a clue the other half won't<br>
> care, prefering to talk instead about the Web UI home page instead.<br>
><br>
> Now it could be just me but I really don't see any investment in<br>
> Workflow stuff, just a tacit acceptance that it's hanging around so<br>
> people have to be aware of it and be backwards compatible. The only<br>
> driving force behind Workflow now appears to come from the clients who<br>
> use it and rely on it.<br>
><br>
> As with ABAP it seems that SAP aren't dumb, they know they have cash<br>
> cow with Workflow. So it's not like it's going to disappear anytime<br>
> soon. But apart from the massive OO heart bypass we saw from 4.6c to<br>
> ECC 6 little else is on the horizon as far as we know. Perhaps you<br>
> know different?<br>
><br>
> Mike GT<br>
><br>
> Sent from my iPhone<br>
><br>
> On 4 May 2010, at 20:25, "Keohan, Susan - 1140 - MITLL" <<a
href="mailto:keohan@ll.mit.edu">keohan@ll.mit.edu</a><br>
> > wrote:<br>
><br>
>> Hi All,<br>
>> I have seen the decrease in traffic over the past few years. As
a<br>
>> matter of<br>
>> fact, I proposed sunsetting this forum in 2007 - at it's 10-year<br>
>> birthday.<br>
>> At the time, many subscribers asked that the list be kept alive, and<br>
>> so it<br>
>> is.<br>
>> As long as someone sees benefit in it, then it is serving its'<br>
>> purpose.<br>
>><br>
>> Perhaps one way to increase traffic and pour more knowledge into the<br>
>> SAP-WUG<br>
>> fountain is to make a commitment to try to answer - say one question<br>
>> a week<br>
>> - even if it's a little time-consuming? I'll sign up for that.<br>
>><br>
>> As for Business Workflow receding and waning as a skill set - I<br>
>> respectfully<br>
>> disagree. It's true there are new tools and new technologies,
but<br>
>> I still<br>
>> see workflow as the workhorse it is.<br>
>><br>
>> Regards,<br>
>> Sue<br>
>><br>
>> ----<br>
>> Susan R. Keohan<br>
>> SAP Workflow Specialist<br>
>> Enterprise Applications<br>
>> Information Services Department<br>
>> MIT Lincoln Laboratory<br>
>> 244 Wood Street, LI-200<br>
>> Lexington, MA. 02420<br>
>> 781-981-3561<br>
>> <a href="mailto:keohan@LL.MIT.EDU">keohan@LL.MIT.EDU</a><br>
>><br>
>><br>
>> -----Original Message-----<br>
>> From: <a href="mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</a>
[mailto:<a href="mailto:sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu">sap-wug-bounces@mit.edu</a>]
On<br>
>> Behalf Of<br>
>> Madgambler<br>
>> Sent: Tuesday, May 04, 2010 3:04 PM<br>
>> To: SAP Workflow Users' Group<br>
>> Cc: SAP Workflow Users' Group; <a href="mailto:sap-wug-request@mit.edu">sap-wug-request@mit.edu</a><br>
>> Subject: Re: This Group<br>
>><br>
>> Hi,<br>
>><br>
>> No point replying to other posts on this thread as the original<br>
>> message is succinct enough to merit a direct response.<br>
>><br>
>> I think the attention being paid to this forum is directly<br>
>> proportional to the amount and complexity of Workflow development<br>
>> being carried out and the depth of Workflow development experience in<br>
>> the average subscriber.<br>
>><br>
>> Now it could be argued that fewer 'new' Workflow issues being<br>
>> discussed here could mean good or bad things are happening in the real<br>
>> world. From my personal experience it seems more likely that SAP<br>
>> Buisiness Workflow is receding as a tool and waning as a skillset.<br>
>><br>
>> Granted it's more immediately accessible to the general Client because<br>
>> it's embedded in the standard offering. But are people pushing the<br>
>> boundaries of what it can do or have we hit them already and that's as<br>
>> far as SAP plan to take it?<br>
>><br>
>> These days the juicier Business Process Modelling projects are being<br>
>> done in the Composite Environment (Java) arena and less often in the<br>
>> ABAP stack at all.<br>
>><br>
>> So rather than this Forum losing support I would actually argue that<br>
>> Workflow itself has reached a plateau and stopped evolving. Perhaps<br>
>> only for a while...<br>
>><br>
>> Regards,<br>
>><br>
>> Mike GT<br>
>><br>
>> Sent from my iPhone<br>
>><br>
>> On 4 May 2010, at 16:48, Nash John <<a
href="mailto:emailtonash@gmail.com">emailtonash@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<br>
>><br>
>>> Hi<br>
>>><br>
>>> I get the feeling that this group is slowly but steadily loosing
its<br>
>>> significance as I don't see members active/willing to get involved<br>
>>> in discussion/help as it used to be 3 to 4 years ago.<br>
>>><br>
>>> Thanks<br>
>>><br>
>>> Nash<br>
>>> _______________________________________________<br>
>>> SAP-WUG mailing list<br>
>>> <a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><br>
>>> <a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug"
target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> SAP-WUG mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><br>
>> <a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug"
target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><br>
>> _______________________________________________<br>
>> SAP-WUG mailing list<br>
>> <a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><br>
>> <a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug"
target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> SAP-WUG mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><br>
> <a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
SAP-WUG mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
SAP-WUG mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:SAP-WUG@mit.edu">SAP-WUG@mit.edu</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug" target="_blank">http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/sap-wug</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>