|
From: Shane H. <sh...@zo...> - 2002-01-07 22:13:55
|
Thoughts flowing openly... ;-) I like the direction OpenFlow (0.5) is going. It's getting easier to use. I'd like to suggest renaming a few things for clarity: "Process" becomes "Process definition" and "Instance" becomes "Process instance". IMHO the word "process" alone can be interpreted to mean either a definition or an instance, and the word "instance" alone doesn't say what it is an instance of. I need to understand better what an application is. Is its purpose to allow you to poke an URL when an activity happens? If so, it might be better to create a general-purpose Zope URL Poker and allow the workflow to use any callable Zope object as a hook. After I create an instance of a process, I can click a link to "activate" it, then "activate" its workitem, then "complete" the workitem, then "activate" it again, then "complete" it again, then "forward" it indefinitely. What is going on? Shouldn't "workitems" be called "tokens"? It would be very helpful to have an example .zexp of a real workflow with some active and some completed process instances. Shane |