Bug 1086922
| Summary: | Position of annotations not saved | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Retired] JBoss BPMS Platform 6 | Reporter: | Phil Simpson <psimpson> | ||||||||
| Component: | jBPM Designer | Assignee: | Tihomir Surdilovic <tsurdilo> | ||||||||
| Status: | CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE | QA Contact: | Marek Baluch <mbaluch> | ||||||||
| Severity: | high | Docs Contact: | |||||||||
| Priority: | high | ||||||||||
| Version: | 6.0.1 | CC: | kverlaen, rrajasek, rzhang | ||||||||
| Target Milestone: | CR1 | ||||||||||
| Target Release: | 6.0.2 | ||||||||||
| Hardware: | x86_64 | ||||||||||
| OS: | Unspecified | ||||||||||
| Whiteboard: | |||||||||||
| Fixed In Version: | Doc Type: | Bug Fix | |||||||||
| Doc Text: | Story Points: | --- | |||||||||
| Clone Of: | Environment: | ||||||||||
| Last Closed: | 2014-08-06 19:50:44 UTC | Type: | Bug | ||||||||
| Regression: | --- | Mount Type: | --- | ||||||||
| Documentation: | --- | CRM: | |||||||||
| Verified Versions: | Category: | --- | |||||||||
| oVirt Team: | --- | RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host: | |||||||||
| Cloudforms Team: | --- | Target Upstream Version: | |||||||||
| Embargoed: | |||||||||||
| Attachments: |
|
||||||||||
Created attachment 885562 [details]
After
Lanes should not contain Artifacts (like text annotations). You can however have a subprocess that contains Artifacts inside a lane. I have tested with Lanes which contain nodes connected to Artifacts and the positioning worked fine. I cannot fully tell from the screenshots what the double lines are around your nodes (sub-lanes are not currently allowed in designer). Please retest with latest fixes and if issue still persists provide the full bpmn2 instead of partial screenshots so we can test. fix in designer master and 6.0.x branches Lanes cannot contain annotations? This diagram is a reproduction of a widely used standard example, documented here - http://www.omg.org/spec/BPMN/20100601/10-06-02.pdf . The example has the annotation in a lane. See also Camunda's interpretation of the diagram here - http://camunda.org/bpmn/tutorial.html . This also has the annotation in a lane. Most BPMN2 diagrams I have seen have lanes that occupy the entire canvas, as in these two examples, so there is nowhere to place an annotation except in a lane. Created attachment 888518 [details]
BPMN2 file
Here's the BPMN2 for the diagram.
Thanks for the documents. Swimlanes are container nodes which do not include Artifacts. In the examples you provided I think the pictures show them within. Designer is/was moving these annotations outside the swimlane in your example which I think is OK. I have disabled the inclusion of text annotations within smimlanes to helps users with this. the eclipse.bpmn2 metamodel which we currently use does not allow artifacts within lanes. we can look into changing that at some point to be able to do these types of diagrams. Hi Tiho - I'm trying to find where in the BPMN2 spec its says that Artifacts cannot be contained in Lanes. I can't find any mention of that relative to Annotations, but it does specifically say that Groups can be in lanes and provides an example on p. 69 of a Group spanning multiple Lanes/Pools. Since Groups are also Artifacts I'm confused as to where this restriction is defined? we use the eclipse.bpmn2 implementation of the spec (https://github.com/eclipse/bpmn2). see : http://i.imgur.com/RiP53DZ.png http://i.imgur.com/cGEq10N.png shows lanes currently cannot contain artifacts, in contrast to subprocesses. we can change/update this if we find it is not according to the spec. Thanks Tiho. My opinion, I don't think there's anything wrong with the metamodel. It's a question of how we interpret the placement of Artifacts on the canvas. I don't think there's any semantic meaning implied by the placement of a Text Annotation in a Lane, although I am not an expert of course. In my interpretation, all Annotations are contained by the Process or SubProcess in which they are defined, regardless of where they are positioned on the diagram. I would argue that placing an annotation in a Lane does not imply that it is contained within that Lane. If that's correct then I think it's perfectly valid for the modeler to allow annotations to be placed anywhere, and to attach them all to the Process. I suspect that's what other tools do. I think that preventing the user from placing an annotation in a lane will be annoying. It will force annotations to be placed in illogical locations away from the flow objects they are attached to. OK agreed. Connection and inclusion rules in Designer drawing canvas currently follow the eclipse.bpmn2 impl closely. We can add exception and I think this would be a good one. moving back to assigned state added some fixes for this to designer master and 6.0.x branches. please give it a try again and let me know if its better. since i do not have the actual .bpmn2 source of the process here i cannot test fully but have done tests with similar. Apparently I don't have access to the branches, but will test the next build if the fix will be in there. I did upload the .bpmn2 file. It's attached to this bug. Thanks! Ok I must have missed it - sorry. Tested with the attached bpmn2 and the text annotation stays in place :) Let me know if any issues come up. Ryan, can you check if this fix made into the product build? Verified on 6.0.2.CR1. |
Created attachment 885561 [details] Before Description of problem: The position of text annotations on a process diagram is not preserved during save. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): How reproducible: always Steps to Reproduce: 1. Create a text annotation (attachment "Before") 2. Save the diagram 3. Reopen the diagram Actual results: Annotation is displayed in a different location (attachment "after") Expected results: Annotation should not have moved. Additional info: