dear juanjo, my answers in line ... Your response to the following questions is needed so that we can elaborate a response to Arian: > > - Stefano: do you think we can address well points 2, 4 and 5 asked by > Arian and the reviewers within the presentation regarding checkpoints 2 and > 5 ? I believe so but wanted to check your opinion. Of course, you can > count on me for helping to develop the slides. If you agree, we may > respond Arian that those points are going to be address there. > > agree, but i have to confess that the last aspect of point 4 we, testbed team, did not address it in a particular way. so i have to analyse and understand the implications of what expressed in the technical roadmap ... > > - > - SAP and the team working in the presentation regarding the FI-WARE > Value Proposition: may you integrate presentation of the "Third Party > Innovation Deliverable" in that presentation ? If you agree, we may > explain Arian that we were planning to address presentation of the results > of this deliverable in that slot during the second day but we can elaborate > more on it. > - All: would you agree with explaining them what our live demo was > about before hand ? I guess it doesn't harm. > > i think in our response, we must send our story-bord for the demo. perhaps this mgth convince them that it is much better and that it shows the consistency and the integration aspect thye asked, quite strongly i remember, during the last review. certainly we need also to "demo" the specifications and documentation associtaed to the ges. > > - > - Thierry: Is it feasible to prepare something about the Mobile CEP > Engine with such a short notice ? > - SAP: Does it make sense to prepare a demo regarding the Mashup > Factory or the Ericsson Composition Engine ? I don't believe so but ... > how would you justify it and explain that it would be better to use the > Application Mashup GE ? I believe that they have just guided their > decision based on input from UC projects regarding the planned usage of GEs > (shared spreadsheet) but ... as far as I know, not only Finest have decided > to go for using WireCloud but also Outsmart ... is this information correct > ? I believe that if we explain that there are at least two UC projects > who have already decided to use it in their design, we can justify to go > for it instead of the ones they propose > - IBM: would it be feasible that Guy makes a presentation on the > Proton CEP, perhaps a webinar that matches some of the two days if > attendance to the review is not feasible ? > - All: wouldn't it make sense to invite Arian and the reviewers to > attend the webinars regarding some of the GEs they refer to ... as > alternative to cover them as part of the live demo ? > > this makes very much sense, but i guess they will not delay their need to understand the ges till the webinars. this migth happen if and only if they agree to follow the demo through our storybord. > > - > - All: what is your feeling regarding the "Outlook for FI-WARE" ? > > this the value proposition of fi-ware!!!! ciao, stefano > > - > > > Cheers, > > -- Juanjo > > ------------- > Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital > website: www.tid.es > email: jhierro at tid.es > twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro > > FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Chief Architect > > You can follow FI-WARE at: > website: http://www.fi-ware.eu > facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 > twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware > linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 > > > > -------- Original Message -------- Subject: RE: FP7-ICT-285248 FI-WARE - > Official Invitation to M18 Review Meeting Date: Tue, 20 Nov 2012 > 17:39:12 +0000 From: <Arian.ZWEGERS at ec.europa.eu><Arian.ZWEGERS at ec.europa.eu> To: > <jhierro at tid.es> <jhierro at tid.es>, <Vanessa.VANHUMBEECK at ec.europa.eu><Vanessa.VANHUMBEECK at ec.europa.eu> CC: > <jimenez at tid.es> <jimenez at tid.es>, <CNECT-ICT-285248 at ec.europa.eu><CNECT-ICT-285248 at ec.europa.eu>, > <msli at icfocus.co.uk> <msli at icfocus.co.uk>, > <irena.pavlova at isoft-technology.com> <irena.pavlova at isoft-technology.com>, > <rdifrancesco at ymail.com> <rdifrancesco at ymail.com>, <dgr at whitestein.com><dgr at whitestein.com>, > <mcp at tid.es> <mcp at tid.es> > > Dear Juanjo, > > > > Thank you very much for the draft agenda. > > > > Some changes that we would like to see: > > 1) The live demos (day 1, 10.30 – 12.15) need to go in detail with > at least 3 GEs "in full", i.e. including the full set of documentation > and other contents associated with that GE available at Month 18 plus > relevant issues relating to implementation), in addition to the “live > demos” already scheduled. The three (or more) GEs should be drawn from the > chapters 3, 5 & 6 and should be the ones which have generated the greatest > interest so far. So, for chapter 3 it would be the Mashup Factory or the > Ericsson Composition Editor, for ch 5 it would be the Things Mgt GE or the > CEP Mobile Manager (as the Backend Device Mgt GE is not available), and for > ch 6 it would be Proactive Technology Online, the Context Awareness > Platform, the Samson broker, or the Query Broker. > > 2) Somewhere in the agenda the latest status of GE take-up by the > Use Cases, the consortium members themselves, and potentially additional > interests elsewhere needs to be presented. > > 3) Third Party Innovation Enablement is a key deliverable and needs > to be presented. > > 4) Testbed and testing deliverables are also important and should be > presented. It would be good to know how the Test bed actually supports some > of the non-functional capabilities that are listed in the first release in > the Technical Roadmap > > 5) A summary of the status of the validation of the GEs from the Use > Cases and how this is checked back against the requirements needs to be > presented. > > 6) The Closing Statements should include a presentation of Outlook > for FI-WARE from the consortium’s viewpoint. > > 7) To accommodate the above items, Day 2 could end later and the 3 > hours planned for Revision of checkpoints could be shorter. > > > > Best regards, > > Arian > > > > > > *From:* Juanjo Hierro [mailto:jhierro at tid.es <jhierro at tid.es>] > *Sent:* Saturday, November 10, 2012 10:21 AM > *To:* VANHUMBEECK Vanessa (CNECT) > *Cc:* jimenez at tid.es; CNECT-ICT-285248; ZWEGERS Arian (CNECT); > msli at icfocus.co.uk; irena.pavlova at isoft-technology.com; > rdifrancesco at ymail.com; dgr at whitestein.com; mcp at tid.es; jhierro >> "Juan > J. Hierro" > *Subject:* Re: FP7-ICT-285248 FI-WARE - Official Invitation to M18 Review > Meeting > > > > Dear Arian and Vanessa, dear reviewers, > > Please find enclosed a draft agenda for the project review. > > Best regards, > > -- Juanjo > > > ------------- > > Product Development and Innovation (PDI) - Telefonica Digital > > website: www.tid.es > > email: jhierro at tid.es > > twitter: twitter.com/JuanjoHierro > > > > FI-WARE (European Future Internet Core Platform) Chief Architect > > > > You can follow FI-WARE at: > > website: http://www.fi-ware.eu > > facebook: http://www.facebook.com/pages/FI-WARE/251366491587242 > > twitter: http://twitter.com/FIware > > linkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/groups/FIWARE-4239932 > > On 07/11/12 10:43, Vanessa.VANHUMBEECK at ec.europa.eu wrote: > > Dear Mr. Jimenez, > > In accordance with Article II.23 of the contract, and as agreed with you > recently, I hereby inform you of the Commission's intention to hold a > review meeting of the project FP7-ICT-285248 FI-WARE in Brussels, Belgium > on 28th and 29th November 2012. > > The meeting will take place in the premises of the European Commission in > avenue de Beaulieu, 1160 Brussels > > > > Meeting rooms: > > 28th and 29th November avenue de Beaulieu BU25 0/S10 > > > > As agreed with you, the Commission will be assisted by the following > independent experts: > > > > - Dr Renaud Di Francesco > > - Dr. Dominic Greenwood > > - Ms Man-Sze Li > > - Ms Irena Pavlova > > > > The objectives of the review are, in particular, to establish: > > · the degree of fulfillment of the project work plan for the > relevant period and of the related deliverables; > > · the continued relevance of the objectives and breakthrough > potential with respect to the scientific and industrial state of the art; > > · the resources planned and utilized in relation to the achieved > progress, in a manner consistent with the principles of economy, efficiency > and effectiveness; > > · the management procedures and methods of the project; > > · the beneficiaries' contributions and integration within the > project; > > · the expected potential impact in scientific, technologic, > economic, competitive and social terms (where relevant), and the plans for > the use and dissemination of results. > > > > If you have not sent the deliverables for this review period (months 13 to > 18) to the European Commission yet, please do so as soon as possible and > put the experts (see cc) in copy. > > Please send us the draft agenda of this meeting before Friday 9thNovember 2012. > > Please send me the names of the people attending the review before Friday > 23rd November 2012. > > > > Should you have any questions before the meeting, please do not hesitate > to contact me. > > Thank you for your co-operation. > > > > Best Regards, > > > > Vanessa Vanhumbeeck > > *European Commission* > > DG CONNECT > > Unit E3 – Net Innovation > > > > Tel.: +32 2 296 49 39 > Email: vanessa.vanhumbeeck at ec.europa.eu > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------ > > > 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 > > > > > ------------------------------ > > 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 > > _______________________________________________ > Fiware-pcc mailing list > Fiware-pcc at lists.fi-ware.eu > http://lists.fi-ware.eu/listinfo/fiware-pcc > > -- Stefano De Panfilis Chief Innovation Officer Engineering Ingegneria Informatica S.p.A. via Riccardo Morandi 32 00148 Roma Italy tel (direct): +39-068307-4295 tel (secr.): +39-068307-4513 fax: +39-068307-4200 cell: +39-335-7542-567 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <https://lists.fiware.org/private/fiware-wpa/attachments/20121121/3226f24d/attachment.html>
You can get more information about our cookies and privacy policies clicking on the following links: Privacy policy Cookies policy