I'd go with pen and paper, or maybe a white-board if you are feeling fancy.
Desigining a process flow on a computer is just a pain, its much easier to scribble out a flow diagram on paper than it is to mess around with Visio - only worry about computerising it once you need to neatly document your design.
If you are looking for some suitable apps then try this question:
Remember that any system, no matter how big, has a single point that you can start from. Pen and paper is a tried and tested route. A drawing/modelling package is mainly used to communicate those ideas to others as it can be made available on a known server or via email for example.
I tend to stick with UML, but remember that it is a tool to use and unless you're a modelling fanatic diagrams only need to be good enough to get the point across.
I don't even think about the code initially, just what processes need to occur and slap them together. Hence use cases and sequence diagrams are where I start. (Actually I sometimes don't even bother with a use case.)
For speed keep the processes fairly simple (don't bother thinking about underlying logic too deeply) and work incrementally. After all you wouldn't write encryption routines for password handling before you had a means to enter a password, would you.
A sequence diagram is easier than a flow chart IMHO as there is no real need for decision making.
We have been working on an approach to business process representation that departs from the usual workflow approach, i.e. the machine metaphor where the organisation is a "machine" that "executes" the business process. We call it the "work product pool" approach, and it centres around products rather than tasks. As ChrisBD says, there are no single starting points, and the work product pool approachs acknowledges this and uses an opportunistic, people-oriented take to process representation.
If you google for "work product pool" you will find a few articles that describe the approach. The ISO/IEC 24744 standard metamodel is particularly suited to modelling business processes using this approach, too.
发布评论
评论（5）
我会用笔和纸，或者如果你喜欢的话，也可以用白板。
在计算机上设计流程只是一件痛苦的事情，在纸上潦草地写出流程图比使用 Visio 更容易 - 只有当您需要整齐地记录您的设计时才担心将其计算机化。
如果您正在寻找一些合适的应用程序，请尝试这个问题：
什么是最好的 UML 图表工具？
I'd go with pen and paper, or maybe a white-board if you are feeling fancy.
Desigining a process flow on a computer is just a pain, its much easier to scribble out a flow diagram on paper than it is to mess around with Visio - only worry about computerising it once you need to neatly document your design.
If you are looking for some suitable apps then try this question:
What's the best UML diagramming tool?
请记住，任何系统，无论有多大，都有一个可以作为起点的点。
笔和纸是一条经过考验的路线。绘图/建模包主要用于将这些想法传达给其他人，因为它可以在已知服务器上或通过电子邮件等方式提供。
我倾向于坚持使用 UML，但请记住，它是一种可以使用的工具，除非您是建模狂热者，否则图表只需足够好即可表达要点。
我一开始甚至没有考虑代码，只考虑需要发生哪些过程并将它们组合在一起。因此，我从用例和序列图开始。 （实际上，我有时甚至不关心用例。）
为了速度，请保持流程相当简单（不要太深入地考虑底层逻辑）并逐步工作。毕竟，在有办法输入密码之前，您不会编写用于密码处理的加密例程，对吗？
恕我直言，序列图比流程图更容易，因为实际上不需要做出决策。
Remember that any system, no matter how big, has a single point that you can start from.
Pen and paper is a tried and tested route. A drawing/modelling package is mainly used to communicate those ideas to others as it can be made available on a known server or via email for example.
I tend to stick with UML, but remember that it is a tool to use and unless you're a modelling fanatic diagrams only need to be good enough to get the point across.
I don't even think about the code initially, just what processes need to occur and slap them together. Hence use cases and sequence diagrams are where I start. (Actually I sometimes don't even bother with a use case.)
For speed keep the processes fairly simple (don't bother thinking about underlying logic too deeply) and work incrementally. After all you wouldn't write encryption routines for password handling before you had a means to enter a password, would you.
A sequence diagram is easier than a flow chart IMHO as there is no real need for decision making.
我不确定是否有任何特定工具（Visio 除外），但您应该看看业务流程建模符号 (BPMN)。
I'm not sure of any specific tool (other than Visio) but you should have a look at Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN).
业务流程建模符号 (BPMN) 可能会帮助您。我认识一位架构师，他使用 Agilian 来实现此目的，并强烈推荐它。
Business Process Modeling Notation (BPMN) may help you with this. I know an architect who uses Agilian for this and recommends it highly.
我们一直在研究一种与通常的工作流程方法不同的业务流程表示方法，即机器隐喻，其中组织是“执行”业务流程的“机器”。我们称之为“工作产品池”方法，它以产品而不是任务为中心。正如 ChrisBD 所说，没有单一的起点，工作产品池方法承认这一点，并使用机会主义、以人为本的方式来处理表示。
如果您在谷歌上搜索“工作产品池”，您会发现一些描述该方法的文章。 ISO/IEC 24744 标准元模型特别适合也使用这种方法对业务流程进行建模。
We have been working on an approach to business process representation that departs from the usual workflow approach, i.e. the machine metaphor where the organisation is a "machine" that "executes" the business process. We call it the "work product pool" approach, and it centres around products rather than tasks. As ChrisBD says, there are no single starting points, and the work product pool approachs acknowledges this and uses an opportunistic, people-oriented take to process representation.
If you google for "work product pool" you will find a few articles that describe the approach. The ISO/IEC 24744 standard metamodel is particularly suited to modelling business processes using this approach, too.