This example makes use of KOMMA’s object mapping feature as described in Basic object triple mapping and it assumes you are familiar with that feature.


KOMMA allows for binding classes with application logic, which we call Behaviours, to mapped Entities. In this tutorial, we want to show you how to use this feature.

The example we are going to use is a (very simple) process engine. This is somewhat complex but don’t be alarmed, it is stripped down to a bare minimum to highlight the general idea while still being a functional example.

The full source code of this tutorial is available in the KOMMA examples repository on github.

The process engine

To keep matters as simple as possible, we are going to have only four basic elements: Processes consist of a number of Activities (some of which are going to be Tasks requiring manual completion) that are connected by outgoing Transitions.

Additionally, we need to distinguish between static and dynamic aspects for defining and executing our processes. The mappings are therefore separated into DefinitionAspects and RuntimeAspects that are themselves mapped entities from which the other model elements are derived (yes, you can use inheritance for mapped entities).

We arrive at the following application model:

  • DefinitionAspect

    • ProcessDefinition

    • ActivityDefinition

      • TaskDefinition

    • Transition (there is no dynamic aspect to transitions)

  • RuntimeAspect

    • ProcessInstance

    • ActivityInstance

      • TaskInstance

Let us just pick ProcessDefinition and have a look at it:

package net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.model;

import java.util.Set;

import net.enilink.composition.annotations.Iri;

public interface ProcessDefinition extends DefinitionAspect {

        String getName();

        void setName(String name);

        Set<ActivityDefinition> getHasActivity();

        void setHasActivity(Set<? extends ActivityDefinition> hasActivity);


This one maps two properties, one being the name for the process, the other representing the activities it consists of.

For brevity, the rest of these mappings are omitted here, suffice to say they are equally trivial. Please refer to the examples repository on github for the details.

A simple process API

Before defining the API for our runtime, there is one caveat to discuss: a Behaviour needs to be bound to an already mapped Entity, so logic that applies to definition aspects needs to be separated from logic that applies to runtime instances.

To use Process as an example, the behaviour we are going to bind to ProcessDefinition allows the creation of a matching ProcessInstance. We then bind another behaviour to ProcessInstance which provides the methods that operate on the runtime instance.

With that out of the way, this is what our very basic API for process execution looks like (package and import statements omitted for brevity):

public interface IProcessDefinition {
        public ProcessInstance createProcessInstance();

public interface IProcessInstance {
        public ProcessInstance start();
        public boolean end();

public interface IActivityDefinition {
        public ActivityInstance createActivityInstance(
                        ProcessInstance processInstance);

public interface IActivityInstance {
        public boolean enter();
        public boolean execute();
        public boolean leave(String transitionName);

public interface ITaskInstance extends IActivityInstance {
        public boolean complete(String transitionName);

public interface ITransition {
        public boolean activate(ProcessInstance processInstance);
The fact that ITaskInstance extends IActivityInstance is relevant for the discussion below.

This concludes the definition of our mapped entities and the API we want to use for our business logic (the process runtime).


Let us now take a look at the Behaviour class implementing our business method for IProcessDefinition to get an idea about how these behaviour implementations look like:

package net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.runtime;

import java.util.UUID;

import net.enilink.composition.traits.Behaviour;
import net.enilink.komma.core.URI;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.IProcessDefinition;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.IProcessInstance;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.model.ProcessDefinition;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.model.ProcessInstance;

public abstract class ProcessDefinitionSupport implements ProcessDefinition,
                Behaviour<ProcessDefinition>, IProcessDefinition {

        public ProcessInstance createProcessInstance() {
                URI piUri = getURI().appendFragment(
                                "ProcessInstance_" + getURI().fragment() + "_"
                                                + UUID.randomUUID());

                ProcessInstance pi = getEntityManager().createNamed(piUri,


                pi = ((IProcessInstance) pi).start();

                return pi;

As you can see, the actual code for createProcessInstance() is pretty straightforward. It really just creates a new named ProcessInstance, sets the mapped entity on which it was called as the associated ProcessDefinition, then returns the new ProcessInstance after calling start() on it (using another of the API methods we defined).

With respect to the boilerplate code, we only define an abstract class (the convention KOMMA uses is an appended Support suffix) that implements our mapped entity, a Behaviour<> for the mapped entity and (optional) other interfaces (in our case, the API we defined above).

Now, there must surely be some magic hidden somewhere in the implementation of IProcessInstance::start()? See for yourself:

package net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.runtime;

import net.enilink.composition.traits.Behaviour;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.IActivityDefinition;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.IProcessInstance;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.model.ActivityDefinition;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.model.ProcessInstance;

public abstract class ProcessInstanceSupport implements ProcessInstance,
                Behaviour<ProcessInstance>, IProcessInstance {

        public ProcessInstance start() {

                // find and activate the start activity
                // for simplicity, just use name=="start" as indicator
                for (ActivityDefinition activityDef : getUsesDefinition()
                                .getHasActivity()) {
                        if ("start".equals(activityDef.getName())) {
                                ((IActivityDefinition) activityDef)

                return getBehaviourDelegate();

        public boolean end() {

                return true;

Huh, this doesn’t look very different, after all! What’s the deal here, is there more to it?

Why, yes, there is!

There’s a common mechanism that handles the mapped Entities, their accessor methods to the underlying RDF store and the Behaviours that are bound to them. We call this Object Composition and it is actually a very essential part to all of KOMMA.

Now, for our example, you don’t need to understand the details of how the composition mechanism does all the work for you, the general outline will do fine. What it boils down to here is that multiple Behaviours can be available for a given Entity and interface. If we take a close look at TaskInstance, we find that there are actually three Behaviour classes at work (*):

  • ActivityInstanceSupport (the base behaviour for all activities)

  • TaskInstanceSupport (specific behaviour for Tasks)

  • EndInstanceSupport (specific behaviour for End activities **)

Let us look at the first one from that list:

package net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.runtime;

import net.enilink.composition.traits.Behaviour;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.IActivityInstance;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.ITransition;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.model.ActivityInstance;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.model.Transition;

public abstract class ActivityInstanceSupport implements ActivityInstance,
                Behaviour<ActivityInstance>, IActivityInstance {

        public boolean enter() {

                // can be implemented by more specialized support classes
                // be sure to call them and don't just use this.execute()
                ((IActivityInstance) getBehaviourDelegate()).execute();

                return true;

        public boolean execute() {
                if (!STATE_OPEN.equals(getState())) {
                        throw new IllegalStateException("Activity " + getURI()
                                        + " is not open.");

                // can be implemented by more specialized support classes
                // be sure to call them and don't just use this.leave()
                ((IActivityInstance) getBehaviourDelegate()).leave(null);

                return true;

        public boolean leave(String transitionName) {

                // [... get the transition matching the given name ...]


                ((ITransition) transitions[t]).activate(getProcessInstance());

                return true;

Now, as stated above, this is the base behaviour available for all ActivityInstances, including those for Tasks. These also have their own specific behaviour, which we’ll get to in a minute.

An important detail here is the way this base behaviour invokes the other methods. Note that it does not call its own implementations directly but also uses the composition mechanism to invoke the correct one.

This is due to the behaviours not actually inheriting from each other, making virtual methods/dynamic dispatch unavailable for them. We can still achieve the desired result, however, when we use the composition mechanism as shown in the example.


If you take a look at the second of the behaviours relevant to TaskInstances from the list above, you’ll notice something we haven’t shown you yet:

package net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.runtime;

import net.enilink.composition.annotations.Precedes;
import net.enilink.composition.traits.Behaviour;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.IActivityInstance;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.ITaskInstance;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.model.TaskInstance;

public abstract class TaskInstanceSupport implements TaskInstance,
                Behaviour<TaskInstance>, ITaskInstance {

        public boolean execute() {
                // this is a wait-state, not a normal activity

                // returning true here signals the end of the method chaining; in other
                // words, ActivityInstanceSupport.execute() will NOT be called
                return true;

        public boolean complete(String transitionName) {
                if (!STATE_AWAITING_COMPLETION.equals(getState())) {
                        throw new IllegalStateException("Task " + getURI()
                                        + " is not awaiting completion.");

                ((IActivityInstance) getBehaviourDelegate()).leave(transitionName);

                return true;

This behaviour uses the @Precedes annotation to impose an order on the otherwise unordered set of behaviours available for an entity. As detailed in the Object Composition documentation, this will affect the method chaining mechanism by enforcing an invocation order. For our specific case, this means that a call to a method of IActivityInstance will execute the appropriate method of TaskInstanceSupport before that of ActivityInstanceSupport (this is due to ITaskInstance extending IActivityInstance, as noted above).

An important aspect of the method chaining is the influence of the return value. Returning something non-null (or a boolean true) results in the chain being stopped, whereas returning null (or false) causes the chain to continue with the method on the next behaviour.

Imagine the return value as a kind of flag indicating something like "We’re done here, I managed to come up with the answer".

With that being said, let’s look at the third behaviour relevant to ActivityInstances (and therefore, as mentioned, to TaskInstances as well) from the list above. This is more interesting, because it relies on @Precedes as well as on the subtleties of return value and invocation chain:

package net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.runtime;

import net.enilink.composition.annotations.Precedes;
import net.enilink.composition.traits.Behaviour;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.IActivityInstance;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.IProcessInstance;
import net.enilink.komma.example.behaviour.model.ActivityInstance;

public abstract class EndInstanceSupport implements ActivityInstance,
                Behaviour<ActivityInstance>, IActivityInstance {

        public boolean execute() {
                // simplicity: name=="end" designates the end activity
                if (!"end".equals(getUsesDefinition().getName())) {
                        // returning false causes the invocation of this method on the next
                        // behaviour in the chain (here: ActivityInstanceSupport.execute())
                        return false;


                // end activities just terminate the enclosing process instance
                // they cannot be left as there are no outgoing transitions
                ((IProcessInstance) getProcessInstance()).end();

                return true;

Prior to explaining this in detail, let us review our example.

In an effort to keep the process model simple, End and Start are just plain activities, only distinguished by their names ("start" or "end", respectively). For the implementation, this means that any special behaviour needs to be bound to the base entity ActivityInstance and as such results in it being applied to all such instances, including those for Tasks.

*,** Hopefully, this also clears up any questions about why this special behaviour for End should be relevant to Tasks at all.

There’s nothing special to Start though, it has outgoing transitions like other activities and it really just happens to be the initial activity in a process (see ProcessInstanceSupport.start()), so it uses the default behaviour. An End activity, however, is the final activity in a process, which it should end(), and it also lacks outgoing transitions, which are the reasons for binding this third behaviour class to ActivityInstance.

As for the execute() method, consider what you learned about @Precedes and the method chaining. EndInstanceSupport precedes ActivityInstanceSupport (no particular order with respect to TaskInstanceSupport given) and is going to be called for all activities. It is, therefore, imperative that the execute method does its special handling only when it actually deals with an End activity, and falls back to the chain in all other cases (remember that returning something null or a boolean false means that the chain continues with - or falls back to - the next implementation up the chain).

Behaviour registration

We have now taken a look at what needs to be done to implement our process runtime using Behaviours and discussed a few details of doing so, but we still haven’t seen how the binding of these behaviours to the mapped entities from our model works.

As mentioned in the prerequisites, this example assumes you have taken a look at the object mapping example, so this should look familiar.

The example is also using code to set up the KOMMA framework from the object mapping example, so be sure to import both projects into your workspace.
public static void main(String[] args) throws RepositoryException {

        // create a sesame repository
        SailRepository dataRepository = new SailRepository(new MemoryStore());

        // create an entity manager and register concepts
        IEntityManager manager = createEntityManager(new ExampleModule(
                        dataRepository, new KommaModule() {
                                        // model classes, definition
                                        // model classes, runtime

                                        // behaviour classes


If you compare this to the object mapping example, apart from obviously adding the entity classes necessary for our process model, we simply add our behaviour implementations, using the appropriately named addBehaviour() method - and that’s it!

This is really all that needs to be done for registering them. At runtime, the composition framework uses the @Iri annotations to do the mapping and bind the behaviours to the entities as needed.


Let us demonstrate our simple process runtime by defining and executing a short demo process. Again, the idea being to keep this simple, this will do:

Process 'DMC-12 Testrun': Start → Task1 'Invent Flux Capacitor' (Doc) → Task2 'Experience Time Travel' (Einstein) → End

Fast forward beyond the initialization step where we define this process with its activities and their transitions to the part where we execute it:

private static void demonstrateProcess(IEntityManager manager) {
        // [... initialize the example process ...]

        // create and start a new instance of the process
        ProcessInstance processInstance = ((IProcessDefinition) processDef)

        // [... create some output ...]

        ActivityInstance ai1 = processInstance.getCurrentActivity();

        // [... check state, create some output ...]

        ((ITaskInstance) ai1).complete(null);

        // [... refresh, create some output ...]

        ActivityInstance ai2 = processInstance.getCurrentActivity();

        // [... check state, create some output ...]

        ((ITaskInstance) ai2).complete(null);

        // [... refresh, create more output ...]

Though a few things have been omitted in this snippet, the most relevant parts where we actually use our API from within the simple test program show that working with the behaviour classes is pretty straightforward.

If you run the program from the example using our short demo process, the output looks somewhat like this:

process is now in: state=active activity='Invent Flux Capacitor'
complete()ing current task: name='Invent Flux Capacitor', for='Emmett Lathrop 'Doc' Brown', state=awaiting_completion...
process is now in: state=active activity='Experience Time Travel'
complete()ing current task: name='Experience Time Travel', for='Einstein', state=awaiting_completion...
process is now in: state=ended activity='end'
**** Success! Process 'DMC-12 Testrun' has completed! ****
the following activities have been created: name='Invent Flux Capacitor' state=completed transition=toTask2 name='Experience Time Travel' state=completed transition=toEnd name='start' state=completed transition=toTask1 name='end' state=completed transition=null


Using KOMMA behaviours to bind business logic to mapped entities is a very easy way to implement an application on top of RDF data.

You could start working with it right now!