Open PaulLunkenheimer opened 1 year ago
barmac
commented
1 year ago How would you handle a group that spans across multiple participants or is visually partially outside of participant?
Note that semantically groups exist outside of participants.
PaulLunkenheimer
commented
1 year ago Yes, I am aware of that. That is indeed a tricky question.
My first intuition would be to handle groups like semantic children if and only if they are completely contained in a participant visually. Otherwise, they would be left just the way they are at the moment, i.e. they would not be moved along with the participant.
I am aware that this means one could not use the semantic hierarchy of the model but would instead need to compute from the positioning and size of the elements.
Anyways, I do think that the current state is counterintuitive for users, even though I am not sure how to solve this problem.
nikku
commented
1 year ago Turning this into a feature request.
Groups are artifacts and thus can also be stored on a process (bpmn:Process#artifacts). So in theory such interactivity can be implemented:
We'd want to make sure that groups keep their "free form" character, and re-organize transparently to the user as the user changes their bounds.
We'll not pick up this item any time soon as I believe the user impact is rather low. But happy to take your contribution, exploring this topic and potentially contributing it.
Describe the Feature
BPMN Groups exist on their own hierarchy level and are not children of Pools / Swimlanes, even if they are graphically included in one. This leads to unexpected behaviour when moving a Pool / Swimlane.
Steps to Reproduce
See above GIF. Was recorded on 11.07.23 on demo.bpmn.io.
Expected Behavior
Whenever a BPMN Group is graphically included in a Pool / Swimlane, it behaves like all other BPMN elements inside the Pool / Swimlane.
Expected behaviour is thus as if all content was selected using lasso tool (see above GIF).
Environment