Open jan-ladleif opened 4 years ago
Timer event validation was added in #46.
However, the standard does not at all make sense:
would allow diagrams such as this:
But obviously,
C
does not know whether the upper path has been taken, and just starting c
at the first of January would not always be compliant.
The standard is too vague, PR #47 is closed.
We should add additional validation rules, now that we can specify
ItemDefinition
s and such. What I am thinking of from the top of my head:Timer events can now be specified, and impose some restrictions on their context depending on whether they are absolute or relative. For example:
Exclusive gateway conditions can only reference specific message data:
Since there is no required format for those conditions and they can be any formal expression, we cannot be sure which messages are referenced. However, I think we can guess to some degree, e.g., if there is a formal expression
order.price > 50
we may assume there must be a messageorder
sent upstream. If not, we can issue a warning.... and maybe much more other stuff hidden in the standard somewhere.
Proposed Methodology