Thank you Nuria A couple of issues: 1) Meeting in person: Let me clarify that the meeting next week is a WP meeting. Not a sort of General assembly. As you know, several of us will not be present -we are going to Brussels- and also some people, such as Thierry and Pierangelo, will not be here on Friday. As far as I am concerned, I have no problem -as you can imagine- to have the meeting on Friday, but I think it is better not to do it. Also, I somewhat disagree it is better to discuss things in person. I feel it is better to do it in written form. We can do it asynchronously and we can choose the words and the position much better. We also have the written proof and maybe we do not say "too many " foolish things. However, I am not so "radical" and I am not proposing we have a "mail meeting" -even if that would be interesting to try- but rather an audio perhaps with "chat" on top of it. 2) The discussion on WP11 is key, not only for "pleasing" the EC but, essentially to decide what is the future of FIWARE and the PPP as a whole. I think if we are not able to find a reasonable business model for FIWARE, (perhaps with only part of the partners) I cannot imagine who is going to present a proposal for the next phase. We are no longer "learning" but trying to make some money out or it. Certainly, I would like to ask you to consider whether you think continuation of the project is reasonable and what would you change to make it useful for your company. Perhaps we should change the objective of WP11 into analyzing that issue. I agree with Nuria -and the EC- this is key, and would like to invite you to express your opinions on this issue here, by mail. This way we have something discussed in advance for the meeting and, most important, for the future of the PPP. The question essentially is: Do you think Fiware is useful for your company?. What do you expect to have at the end?. Do you see a business opportunity there or just an interesting experiment?. If this is just an interesting experiment, we should go to the EC and say so. They would not be pleased but we have tried. Never promised we would become rich. Then we should design phase 2 as another interesting experiment. That would be a useful result for WP11 If there is a business opportunity, we should try to make it happen in a more serious way. Then WP11 has quite an important job in front. Comments? BR ---- Jose Jimenez Telefonica I+D jimenez at tid.es tf +34 91 4832660 De: Nuria De-Lama Sanchez [mailto:nuria.delama at atosresearch.eu] Enviado el: miércoles, 18 de enero de 2012 19:42 Para: JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO; fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu Asunto: RE: [Fiware-pcc] Next PCC meeting-VERY CAREFUL ATTENTION TO IMPACT Importancia: Alta Dear partners, I have also filled in the doodle with the dates that I can confirm now. The 1st of February and 2nd in the morning I will probably be available but I cannot confirm yet. As Stefano has pointed out, it would be a pity not using the opportunity to discuss in a face-to-face meeting. Things are much easier when you can talk directly to the person. After one full week of FI-WARE meeting it is difficult to believe that there is no way to organize this so that major organizations can be present. In any case, let's wait for the availability of people to discuss and based on that let's close the date. If a physical meeting is organized Friday next week (which I encourage to progress with some "hot" issues), then I will be available. Let me attract your attention to WP11 as something I would particularly like to discuss in the PCC. I think that the EC has made clear comments about the need of industrial companies to get involved in this task. So far the project has taken care of the technical details exclusively. This is not enough. The EC has been very clear saying that even if all GE work this will not mean that the project is successful (success will only come if we have reached the expected impact). I include below ONLY A SUBSET of the comments included in the Review Report. No more words need to be said, I think. The results of FI-WARE are expected to be readily exploitable and used Tangible and significant impacts on the market within 3 to 5 years from the project start. --> This means that impact should be visible already at the ened of the project and in a maximum timeframe of 2 years since then With no formal deliverable from WP11 due for the present review period, it is premature to make any significant comment on the project impact. However, relevant issues did emerge in the course of the review meeting. The consortium is reminded that producing software that works does not by itself lead to results that are useful, usable and used. In line with such discussions, it is essential that: (a) The industrial project partners have a genuine business commitment to the development and implementation of the project results; (b) The Generic Enablers are exploitable, leading to practical and commercially viable exploitation not just by the project partners, but also by external third parties beyond the use cases of the FI-PPP; (c) The integration of the different technologies constituting the baseline assets of FIWARE for GE delivery and GE instantiation and bundling be tackled head-on and early, at both technical level (which impacts on the usability of the GEs) and business level (which impacts on the exploitation potential and prospects); (d) The project works to the timeframe as specified in the DoW, to ensure timely delivery and publication of its outputs. The project must keep engagement of the emerging developer community inside the programme (and outside as far as possible) in acute focus This leads to the need of discussing the Testing Infrastructure and Open Innovation Lab as soon as possible. Progress is acceptable for the present early stage of the project. While there is no deliverable due, and clearly some work has been performed on market analysis etc, the consortium did not give the impression of attaching sufficient importance to exploitation planning, which must be tackled earnestly and must start early Besides this we have received several times the warnings from NEC about Standardization activities. Apparently only two partners have delivered the information agreed. Contributions are not arriving in due time, and the deliverable was expected in M9!!!!!!!! What is the mechanism to change this? We cannot afford closing our eyes and let the responsible partner solve the issue. The project belongs to all of us, and therefore it is the responsibility of ALL of us to react: I think I start to get energies again after Call8 and I would like to insist very much on all these aspects, that are crucial for reviewers and the project will have to show sound progress in the next review and coming deliverables (in M9 and M12!!!!!!!!!). Thanks for your consideration. Nuria de Lama Research & Innovation Representative to the European Commission T +34 91214 9321 F +34 91754 3252 nuria.delama at atosresearch.eu<mailto:nuria.delama at atosresearch.eu> Albarracín 25 28037 Madrid Spain www.atosresearch.eu<http://www.atosresearch.eu> es.atos.net [cid:image002.gif at 01CCD689.91799630] ________________________________ From: fiware-pcc-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu [mailto:fiware-pcc-bounces at lists.fi-ware.eu] On Behalf Of JOSE JIMENEZ DELGADO Sent: miércoles, 18 de enero de 2012 11:57 To: 'fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu' Subject: [Fiware-pcc] Next PCC meeting Dear all As you know, we should be continuing the meetings of the PCC. We have quite a lot of issues to discuss, some of them need quite a lot of extra preparation, that is the reason why we have not been able to continue the discussions we had just before Christmas Next week (23-29) we're having a number of interworkpackage meeting. It would be an ideal time to have our PCC but unfortunately it is impossible due to logistic reasons. Also, most of you would also like to be in the WP meetings. The only alternative would be Friday and we think it would not be suitable to have it that day, everybody in a hurry and our Israeli friends having to work on a free day So I would propose to have an Audio conference the following week. I would set aside at least 3 hours for the audio to have enough time for the quite important issues we need to discuss. I have settled this Doodle<http://www.doodle.com/ser5u3733t36dkpp> to decide the best time. Please vote. I am proposing the following agenda. Please tell me if you would include something else: PROPOSED AGENDA 1) General project coordination Feedback on the WP meeting of the previous week. Possible effort movements and adjustment Possible revision on project review report (if required) Exploitation Strategy. Initial considerations. 2) Fiware Architecture Board representative. (We are having some discussions to solve the issue. In any case, we plan to send a detailed profile of the required person asap). Even if the profile will be sent, we still ask you to consider the issue internally and, eventually propose solutions - I presume you already know what is required to be a AB member) 3) Feeback on PPP Steering Board activities. PPP Scheduling problems and possible actions 5) Scientific Committee. Possible actions and role of the group. Financial constraints. 6) Open call approval and related actions 7) AOB BR ---- Jose Jimenez Telefonica I+D jimenez at tid.es tf +34 91 4832660 ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx ------------------------------------------------------------------ This e-mail and the documents attached are confidential and intended solely for the addressee; it may also be privileged. If you receive this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and destroy it. As its integrity cannot be secured on the Internet, the Atos group liability cannot be triggered for the message content. Although the sender endeavours to maintain a computer virus-free network, the sender does not warrant that this transmission is virus-free and will not be liable for any damages resulting from any virus transmitted. Este mensaje y los ficheros adjuntos pueden contener informacion confidencial destinada solamente a la(s) persona(s) mencionadas anteriormente pueden estar protegidos por secreto profesional. Si usted recibe este correo electronico por error, gracias por informar inmediatamente al remitente y destruir el mensaje. Al no estar asegurada la integridad de este mensaje sobre la red, Atos no se hace responsable por su contenido. Su contenido no constituye ningun compromiso para el grupo Atos, salvo ratificacion escrita por ambas partes. Aunque se esfuerza al maximo por mantener su red libre de virus, el emisor no puede garantizar nada al respecto y no sera responsable de cualesquiera danos que puedan resultar de una transmision de virus. ------------------------------------------------------------------ ________________________________ Este mensaje se dirige exclusivamente a su destinatario. Puede consultar nuestra política de envío y recepción de correo electrónico en el enlace situado más abajo. This message is intended exclusively for its addressee. We only send and receive email on the basis of the terms set out at http://www.tid.es/ES/PAGINAS/disclaimer.aspx -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-pcc/attachments/20120119/721b086f/attachment.html> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.gif Type: image/gif Size: 78 bytes Desc: image001.gif URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-pcc/attachments/20120119/721b086f/attachment.gif> -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image002.gif Type: image/gif Size: 816 bytes Desc: image002.gif URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-pcc/attachments/20120119/721b086f/attachment-0001.gif>
You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy