Ontology Construction - Enterprise Information Systems Design, Implementation and Management: Organizational Applications - page 68

solutions and recommendations maintaining its readability. Coloring activities

according to significance seems to be one path
to further investigations on this subject.
On the completeness of the Transaction Pat-
tern to analyze the range of transactions a doubt is
established in this work reasoning if the Transac-
tion Pattern will comply with all the transactions,
even the more complex ones.
Future research may include discussing in
detail complex cases and analyzes the Transaction
Pattern coverage on every situation.

Naturally, all the representation languages have its
advantages and disadvantages. One BMPN dia-
gram that shows all the actions has to be overloaded
with annotations which, in the case of complex
processes, can be hard to read - minimizing anno-
tations can be achieved, for example, by coloring
BPMN activities. On the other hand representing
the transaction pattern and the four models equals
drawing five different models, reading each one
(which implies knowing five different notations)
and comparing each representation to produce an
understood representation of reality.
Referring the transaction pattern consistency
there is no answer to the requestor until the deci-
sion has been made and it is assumed that, after
the mission has been performed, that everything
went according to plan. Actually, there are some
elements that can jeopardize mission accomplish-
ment such as aircraft malfunction (Air Force
responsibility), weather, political rules, and third
party flight authorizations (third party responsibili-
ties). However, when the requestor receives the
“State” from the Air Force he already knows that
he is due to “Accept” the mission even if it is not
successfully due to third party responsibilities.

concLusion

Dietz Enterprise Ontology introduces a new
methodology for representing processes and
decomposes its representation into four different
diagrams while also verifies, based on the Trans-
action Pattern, the coherence of process actions.
Chapter two and three revisit the concept
of ontologies and, in particular, the Enterprise
Ontology formal defined terms and the TOVE
organizational object taxonomy.
Dietz Enterprise Ontology proposes a “new”
form of ontology that, while characterizing the
elements that are involved also validates the
actions present in the Transaction Pattern that
comprehends four stages: “Request”, “Promise”,
“State” and “Accept”. To fully represent a process,
Dietz uses the Volley case to introduce new nota-
tions to four models (“Process”, “Action”, “State”
and “Construction”). A question arises: do existing
notations permit the models representation?
Using the Air Force Mission Request process,
more complex, than the Volley, the authors propose
to represent, the “Process” and “State” models
using standard BPMN diagram, while applying
and discussing Dietz transaction pattern. Both
the Mission Request and the Volley have two
ontological statements, however the inside-tasks
are different as they depend on one actor that as

future reseArch directions

Towards an understood representation of real-
ity both models (BPMN and the “Process” and
“State” models can be used. Naturally, both have
advantages and disadvantages.
BPMN is a widely used and understood mod-
eling language. Using BPMN will short the user
learning process. However, BMPN diagrams
when taking advantage of its full notation tend to
be confusing and therefore hard to read. Future
research directions include investigating new ways
of using the full scope of BMPN notation while