55 rule missing di

[MaxTru]

Please note:

• We have no BPMNDI information attached to nodes we retrieve as part of the check() function
• There were 2 solution architectures:
  1. Change the library to also include BPMNDI information for each element as part of the check() function
  2. Dont change the library, within a new rule bring BPMN elements and BPMNDI together using the BPMN:Definitions node

I decided for option 2 since:

• We already pass the BPMNDI information, but simply as seperate nodes. Including BPMNDI to each invidiual node, would not fit to that solution decision.
• Currently no second use case that requires option 1 (besides this ticket)
• Minimal change for same end result.

Special case signavio

• No errors are reported in signavio diagrams. However missing BPMNDI in signavio is not supported.

Which issue does this PR address?

Closes #55

Acceptance Criteria

• [ ] Corresponds to the concept
• [ ] Corresponds to the design

Definition of Done

• [ ] corresponds to the design principles
• [ ] corresponds to the code standards
• [ ] passes Continuous Integration checks
• [ ] available as feature branch on GitHub
  • [ ] contains the cleaned up commit history
  • [ ] commit messages satisfy our commit message guidelines
  • [ ] a single commit closes the issue via Closes #issuenr

[nikku]

Looks like your PR broke support for Node@10. Could you have a look?

[nikku]

Regarding your implementation notes, I fully agree. If more of these use-cases emerge, we can consider to create utilities that bring both, semantics and UI together. For the time being, joining these on the definition node makes absolute sense.

[nikku]

TBD: Signavio special cases?

Find some test diagrams for these special cases here.

Expectation: No warnings happen in these cases, as diagram elements are drawn in a different DI Diagram, right?