Admin Status ID Name Country LOI Org Profile Admin/XLS Details Exploit MM

apprenticegunnerInternet και Εφαρμογές Web

22 Οκτ 2013 (πριν από 8 χρόνια και 17 μέρες)

1.108 εμφανίσεις



Page
1

of
85

Based on the
ITEA 2 PO

template v5.0
(Jan. 2010)


Admin Status

ID

Name

Country

LOI


Org
Profile

Admin/XLS
Details

Exploit

MM

1

TIE

Stuart

NL
-

Lead

Done/Have

Done/Have

Done/Have

Yes


2

Twente

Egon

NL

Done/Have

Done/Have

Done/Have

Yes


3

Phillips

Kees

NL

Founder


Don’t need

Done/Have

SC TO
CHECK

???

50
PM.

4

Telefonica

Nik

ES
-

Lead

By 24/03

Done/Have

Done/Have

Yes


5

ATOS

German

ES

Done/Have

Done/Have

Done/Have

Yes


6

Answare

Tonny

ES

Done/Have

SC
TO
CHECK

Done/Have

???


7

UPM

ES

Done/Have

Done/Have

Done/Have

Yes

54
MM
to
72
MM

8

Barcelo


ES

Mailed
german
22/03

Done/Have

Done/Have

Yes


9

Horizons

EG
-

Lead

Done/Have

Done/Have

Done/Have

Yes


10

FCI

EG

???

Done/Have

???

Yes


11

Media Intl

EG

???

Done/Have

???

Yes


12

Eteration

TK

???

???

???

???


13

AzaharSC

Alaa

EG

???

Part Have

???

???


1
4

MANTIS

Aydin

TK

???

???

???

???


1
5

Turkey3

TK

???

???

???

???




TK NCP

Ezgi Bener
[ezgi.bener@tubitak.gov.tr]


Ms. Betul Macit








EG NCP


Yousra Mohamed Sabry
[ysabry@itida.gov.eg]


Sally Metwally Mohamed









Proposal Part B: page
2

of
85



Project Outline

SMASH
-
ITea


Smart Mash
-
Up

• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •




Edited by:



Stuart Campbell

Date:




2010
-
03
-
03

Document version no.:


1.0 (
see ‘History’ on page 2
)


“The no
-
mash
-
up mash
-
up
project

















FCI

ETERATION

MANTIS, TK3


This document will be treated as strictly confidential. It will not be disclosed to anybody not having
signed the ITEA 2
Declaration of

Non
-
Disclosure.




Proposal Part B: page
3

of
85

HISTORY

(
limited to

the releases submitted

to the ITEA

2

Office)


Document
version #

Date

Remarks

v.1.0

2010/03/15

First submitted document






Proposal Part B: page
4

of
85

Table of Contents

1.

Project summary

................................
................................
................................
...........................

6

1.1.

ACRONYM and full
-
length title

................................
................................
...............................

6

1.2.

Abstract

................................
................................
................................
................................
.

6

1.3.

Project dur
ation

................................
................................
................................
......................

6

1.4.

Positioning on the ITEA Roadmap (edition 3)

................................
................................
.........

6

1.4.1.

Application Domains

................................
................................
................................
...

6

1.4.2.

Technology Categories

................................
................................
...............................

6

1.5.

Main project contact person

................................
................................
................................
...

6

2.

Project short description

................................
................................
................................
..............

8

2.1.

General goals and expected impact

................................
................................
.......................

8

2.2.

Market relevance (market State
-
of
-
the
-
Art)

................................
................................
.............

9

Target Stakeholders

................................
................................
................................
.............

11

2.3.

Technical and strategic relevance (relevance for software
-
intensive systems)

......................

13

2.3.1.

Technology state
-
of
-
the
-
art

................................
................................
.......................

13

2.3.2.

Innovation

................................
................................
................................
.................

17

2.4.

Major visible expected results

................................
................................
..............................

22

2.5.

Dissemination and Exploitation of Results

................................
................................
............

22

2.5.1.

Dissemination

................................
................................
................................
...........

22

Standard
s Impact

................................
................................
................................
.................

24

2.5.2.

Exploitation

................................
................................
................................
...............

24

3.

Consortium overview

................................
................................
................................
..................

29

3.1.1.

Roles

................................
................................
................................
........................

32

3.1.2.

Control M
echanisms

................................
................................
................................
.

34

4.

Description of work and work organisation

................................
................................
...............

35

4.1.

Work plan

................................
................................
................................
............................

39

4.1.1.

Work Package 1

................................
................................
................................
........

39

4.1.2.

Work Package 2

................................
................................
................................
........

41

4.1.3.

Work Package 3

................................
................................
................................
........

43

5.

Major Milestones / deliverables

................................
................................
................................
..

60

6.

Rationale for funding

................................
................................
................................
..................

60

7.

Contacts with Public Authorities
................................
................................
................................

62

8.

Appendices

................................
................................
................................
................................
.

64

8.1.

Consortiu
m description
................................
................................
................................
.........

64

8.1.1.

[Company #1 name]

................................
................................
................................
..

64

8.1.2.

TIE

................................
................................
................................
............................

64

8.1.3.

ATOS ORIGIN

................................
................................
................................
..........

65

8.1.4.

BARCELO

................................
................................
................................
.................

68

8.1.5.

TELEFONICA

................................
................................
................................
...........

66

8.1.6.

PHILIPS

................................
................................
................................
....................

65

8.1.7.

[University / Institute #1 name]

................................
......

Error! Bookmark no
t defined.




Proposal Part B: page
5

of
85

8.1.8.

SMASH
-
ITEA :
The Use Case

................................
................................
.....................

2

8.1.9.

SMASH
-
ITEA: Technology Principles

............................

Error! Bookmark not defined.





Proposal Part B: page
6

of
85

1.

Project summary

1.1.

ACRONYM
and full
-
length title

SMASH
-
ITea



Smart Mash
-
Up

1.2.

Abstract
1

User
s

have one aim


using functionality on the web and devices by conceptually interconnecting and
converging what they see and they want to do this easily, without barriers and in network enabled
ways.
SMASH
-
ITea

focus is on auto
-
recognising services
from we
b pages
and then allowing users to
mash them together in a
drag
-
and
-
drop
visual way while hiding the technology & innovation behind it.

1.3.

Project duration
2

36 Months

1.4.

Positioning on the ITEA Roadmap

(edition 3)
3

1.4.1.

Application Domains

Major:


Me

Minor:


Services

and Software Creation
,
Group


1.4.2.

Technology Categories

Major:


Interaction (More than Human, Multimodal and Multi Device)

Minor

1
:

Content & Knowledge (Representation, Acquisition & Processing)

Minor

2


Engineering (Service)

1.5.

Main project contact person

Are
you an employee of, or acting on behalf of, one of the
ITEA 2 Founding Companies
4

(or an affiliate
5

thereof)

NO
6

If YES, indicate which ITEA 2 Founding Company

.....................................................................






1

This abstract is intended to
be used
by the ITEA 2
Office
(e.g.
in slides

or in the symposium handout
)

and should
therefore by no means exceed two lines

based on the font Arial

10 ITEA 2 standard (character spacing: expanded 0.2
pt and line spacing: multiple 1.2 pt).

2

In months.

3

ITEA Roadmap for Software
-
Int
ensive Systems and Services (3
rd

edition, February 2009)



http://w
ww.itea2.org/itea2_roadmap_3
.

4

The ITEA 2 Founding Companies are indicated at the ITEA 2 website:
http://www.itea2.org/founding_partners
.

5

Affiliated companies are defined in the ITEA 2 Frame Agreeme
nt.

6

Delete YES or NO, according to the situation.




Proposal Part B: page
7

of
85

TIE

Contact person

Mr

Stuart Campbell

Complete
address

Address

Antareslaan 22
-
24

Town

Hoofddorp

Postal code

2132 JE

Country

The Netherlands

Fix t
elephone

+
31 20 658 9000

Mobile phone

+44 7970429 251

Fax

N/A

E
-
mail

Stuart.campbell@tieglobal.com






Proposal Part B: page
8

of
85

2.

Project
short
description

2.1.

General goals

and expected impact

Be

as

clear

and
specific

as possible and highlight what the
expected impact

is.

The use of a drawing can support the text and be much clearer than a long text.

(3 Pages)

Which user has ever heard
of, or wants to hear of SOA
, Services, Repositories, Annotation and
Context?

No
-
one of course, because people do not think in technologies
-


they want to solve specific
problems.
They have
one
aim


using functionality from
web and devices

for solving a s
pecific
problem
. For this they usually want to

conceptually interconnect and converg
e

what they see
and
they want to do this
easily, without barriers

and in
network enabled

ways.
Without,
r
egistries,
service and process composition

SLAs
.


The focus is on
auto
-
recognising services and then mashing them together in a visual way
by
users and
hiding the technology

and innovation behind it.
SMASH
-
ITea

is m
oving from the drag
-
and
-
drop of desktop files
,

to the drag
-
and
-
drop of services
that are automatically gen
erated from
websites and other devices and that are considering context information automatically.
No
developers. Just Users
and to do this in
natural environments
: web, mobile device and new
paradigms like natural language and surface computing

as well
as webTV
.


The conceptual understanding of
SMASH
-
ITea

is easy. People, you and those around you, do the
operations that
SMASH
-
ITea

would like to enable more

efficiently.
Interoperating services...even
when the applications surrounding us are not yet serv
ice enabled
.
SMASH
-
ITea

will solve this
through
deep technological advance
as

service recognition and composition in particular.


For example,
you

may visit a weather forecast website
and drag it to another browser tab of a
travel

booking
website

since you want to make a booking to some
where hot and cheap to get to
. This is where
SMASH
-
ITea

comes into the game:
SMASH
-
ITea

will now
automatically analyze

the two websites and
create
individual formalised services

out of them (smart
service recogniti
on
). It will then
combine those
formalised services

and make them interoperable
through its
recognition engine

(service composition)

which composes and converges the two constructed
services. This
re
construction
will be done visually
(people can see that
websites are merged) and
technically (
through service wiri
ng
) taking advantage
of
templates, context and service memories

if
available.


It needs to be explicitly stated that
SMASH
-
ITea

is a user centric v
isual
e
nvironment and thus the best
description is in a visual sequence one
example

of which is in Annex A

and it is suggested to be read
at this point
.


The SMASH
-
ITea high
-
level architecture has
already been thought through and discussed
with individual partne
rs who support it. Of
course this needs to be further engineered and
detailed during the course of the project to take
account of different facets. The preliminary
architecture is also shown and discussed in the
annex of this document.


SMASH
-
ITea

: The
no
-
mash
-
up, mash
-
up
pr
o
ject





Proposal Part B: page
9

of
85

The impact and benefit of
SMASH
-
ITea

is the following:


Today

SMASH
-
ITea

Impact

Static mashup creation process

Dynamic mashup creation and adaptation

Aimed at technologists and not users

Totally u
ser
-
centric service frontend

with high
-
user
empowerment

Not considering the experience level of
the user

Advantage through w
isdom of crowds
recommendation/template engine

Restricted use of context data

Context
ual sensitivity through d
evice and
s
ituation

awareness

Orchestration but

no semantic
interoperability

Easily s
emantically linking services through semantic
pathways

Centralized access

Federated P2P open system

F
inding mas
hable services

can be a
time
-
consuming task

Sharing and reutilising existing services/mashups

Services
are much hyped but little used

Prosumer environment for services


gust do it

aifficult
y

of service enabling existing
funct
i
潮o
l
ity

䵡ki湧⁳敲eic敳⁦rom⁷敢si瑥t

pervices are too complex for pjbs

blimi湡瑥t b
慲ai敲e⁦潲o
p
r潶i摥r⁓䵅s

jaking services tha
t are never used

䵯r攠e摶慮c敤⁡ 搠dyn慭ic lin攠e潭m畮i瑩敳

lnly the experts can make services
which has minimised impact

l晦敲楮朠g⁧ 敡瑥爠湵m扥r m潲攠o敬ia扬e⁡ 搠dff潲摡扬攠
s敲eic敳

iack of UMWOM simple to use standards

䥭灬em敮瑡tio渠
潲i敮t慴a搠䍅丠k瑡湤慲摳 i湰畴



2.2.

Market

relevance

(market State
-
of
-
the
-
Art)

Present a
‘competitive analysis’

for your project: describe the landscape in terms
of competing or

alternative solutions
; explain the
impact of the project for the European Ind
ustries
, with respect to the

competition and to the
main market trends
.


This § should enable to answer to the following questions:



Is there an adequate ‘Market Analysis’ section (including competitors’ description)?



Are
the market opportunities

clearly documented for
each partner
?


Impact on European Industries

SMASH
-
ITea

will increase service usage for
both
free and paid services which will obviously have a
high impact for the software and service industry as their services will be used much more.
SMASH
-
ITea

will cause this increase of usage by making the usage easy for users which will automatically
lead to
an increase in service usage. A good example for this phenomenon is the Apple iPhone where
Apple sells millions of small applications each day.


The concept of selling software applications
existed

long before the iPhone came to the
market, and as such it

was not new, but it was not used very often by users


just like services

are not used to day in reality
. However, the difference that Apple made was integrating the
AppStore into the iPhone and making the buying process and the usage or applications as
e
asy as possible


just like
SMASH
-
ITea

will do for services…


SMASH
-
ITea

will provide European company/individual impact by:




Offering a greater number of more reliable and affordable services

SMASH
-
ITea

will potentially
turn
each website into a service. According to the SEEKDA crawler,
there are currently
only
about 30k true public web services in the market


compared to over 3
b
illion public web pages.




Proposal Part B: page
10

of
85



F
lexible and resilient platforms

SMASH
-
ITea

will be based on automatic se
rvice recognition algorithm
s
. Th
e

algorithm
s

will
extract services based on key elements such as semantic descriptions, forms, mark
-
ups, etc. this
means that services will still be usable correctly at a later stage even if the original website
change
s
. It
not, then
SMASH
-
ITea

will use the automatic service recognition algorithm again to re
-
recognize the service. In contrast to this, normal/traditional services fail even when small
parameter specifications change.



Technologies tailored to meet key societal a
nd economical needs

SMASH
-
ITea

is truly meeting social and economical needs as it helps people to save the most
important thing they have:
time
.


SMASH
-
ITea

makes it much easier to combine different information from various sources and to apply
them automa
tically to their needs. Of course users could combine information from different websites,
devices and other sources
themselves
but it takes a lot of time
to essentially learn development and
time
that people could otherwise spend differently.
Assume that
each time SMASH
-
ITea would be
used this saves 1 hour labour time for a person. Moreover, assume that SMASH could be used 4x per
hour, people are 4 hours a day online, and 0.1% of the people in Europe that are online (40% of the
total population) will actua
lly use it. Then, with Europe's population of 1000M people, this would save
6,400,000 hours of labour per year within Europe; i.e., 4*4 (SMASH
-
use per day) * 0.1% of 40% of
1000M (users). Even if this figure was 10x or 100x wrong, it is still a very large
saving


Beyond this
,

it

i
s not just a
tangible
time saving
proposition
but a value proposition and an opportunity
to make a users own value
from its use
.

They will be able to act as prosumers creating new and
unimagined combination of services.


Market

A
n
alysis’

Considering the information of the last section and the genericness, it may be stated that the potential
market size of
SMASH
-
ITea

is multi
-
million Euro although of course
the project

does not suggest to
say this is what it will achieve through exp
loitation

since invariably the partners only have a certain
ability to reach into the complete market.
However, it has to be considered that
nearly 100% of
companies
today
do
not create services and do not link the
irs

with others
due to the high
technical

skills needed. This is testified by the

Seekda!
” f
igures on the number of true services. Thus
given the
right tools set this can expand dramatically.


In a B2B context

(ie the mashup of services by companies)

Ezine suggests that the integration tools
market will be“
$2.2 billion by 2010”

although from this “
data integration software only make up 20%”

or
approximately 400 million. Of course this isn’t the full picture either since this aspect of the market
comm
only includes everything from workflow control, application interconnectivity through to
service
interconnectivity

itself. It is hard to predict the exact market size of a semantic
and service
based inter
connection suite but if only 1% was related to int
egration this would still be a large market each year.
But the reality is the market is bigger since such statistics tend to focus on the pure integration market
and not the total picture.


SME
Partners have
all
noticed the in
creasing demand of companie
s wanting to expose their
application in a service orientated
way in order to cut down the costs of collaboration and individuals to
build their own apps or reutilise others and creating new ones. However the main barrier in either case
today is the increa
sing complexity of
the task
. This leads to a high investment in the kick
-
off phase in
order to connect
one set of information to services of others.
SMASH
-
ITea

helps to lower this barrier.


SMASH
-
ITea

is interesting for all companies that have

to regularly deal with
interoperability with

new
business partner
s
. Of course from the service wiring side and the engagement of individuals the
market is significantly more albeit and significantly reduced application incomes

per implementation.


Traditi
onal syntax based
integration

products are the main competitors of SLINKY in the both the B2B
domain

although these all tend to be business document based

Since
the project

provides an
innovative approach which has proven to be successful
to date
it is as
sumes that SLINKY could reach
a market share of
0.1
% within the first 5 years. For the service wiring side of things there are no



Proposal Part B: page
11

of
85

absolute known competitors with a similar applicat
io
n


the competitor
are

really developers who have
already wired existing
services together manually.


The market trends will invariably generate new innovative competitors but right now there are no
know competitors which truly replicate the projects goals since most activity to date is based on
process orchestration, service o
r semantics but all in a decoupled and non
-
integrated
environment/


Target
Stakeholders

SMASH
-
ITea

will target End Users, Service Providers and Web Application Providers.


End Users



The consortium strongly believes that success of a new technology can only happen if this
technology is accepted by a wide audience. In the past, services have only been used by a very
small amount of people.
SMASH
-
ITea

will open this to allow anyone in th
e web to make true use
of services.
SMASH
-
ITea

puts the user in the center of all developments and research. As such,
SMASH
-
ITea

is doing research for users and with users through its use cases and focus groups.



SMASH
-
ITea

will provide an end user transpar
ent environment which is the interface between the
SMASH
-
ITea

components and the users. Users may drag & drop websites together and will assist
them when tuning a website into a service and when connecting different services.



SMASH
-
ITea

targets different t
ypes of end users: It targets private users such as kids, mothers,
seniors, etc.
SMASH
-
ITea

also targets professional users such as business men that want to
book business trips for conferences or meetings.


Application Providers



One of the most interesti
ng and unique capability of
SMASH
-
ITea

is to automatically turn web
applications into services. Users may simply visit web pages and may drag and drop them
together.
SMASH
-
ITea

will automatically start to analyze the website and to recognize services
from
the web application.



Web application providers do not need to do any changes in their applications to make them
usable by
SMASH
-
ITea

. However, they may decide to support
SMASH
-
ITea

by adding some
metadata into their HTML code which will make it easier for

SMASH
-
ITea

to recognize services.



Web application providers will benefit from
SMASH
-
ITea

because
SMASH
-
ITea

will combine their
web application service with the service of other web applications. This will lead to an increased
number of users and to a wide
r scope of their web application.


Service Providers



The
next

target group of
SMASH
-
ITea

is service providers.
SMASH
-
ITea

makes it very
comfortable for service providers to be part of
SMASH
-
ITea

. They may either publish their service
without caring about
SMASH
-
ITea

and then only supply a URL to the
SMASH
-
ITea

system in
order to ensure that their service is added.
SMASH
-
ITea

will support SOAP based webServices as
well as RESTful services.



The
SMASH
-
ITea

storage memory (repository) will allow service provide
rs to store their services
and to describe them.

ITea
also makes use of other repository developments such as the
SEEKDA service repository.



Service providers may “help”
SMASH
-
ITea

to deal with their service in an optimal way. In order to
do this,
SMASH
-
I
Tea

will provide them a possibility for annotating their services with popular
service annotation facilities such as WSMO, WSMO
-
Lite and MicroWSMO.


Researchers



In addition, and whilst not strictly a target,
SMASH
-
ITEA

will also impact the research domain
with
the involved research organization being able to take advantage of the research results and
improving the credibility and functioning of their departments. Since SMASHs results are open,
external organizations will also be able to take similar advant
ages.


Market Opportunities per partners




Proposal Part B: page
12

of
85

The
SMASH
-
ITEA

project will have a large
opportunity potential on both

the industrial and the
research sector related to
service

dynamism and
service interoperable organisations; for example:




The project can serve as a catalyst that fosters the position of
European technology providers

including service

vendors such as
TID, TIE, etc
. The results of this project will reinforce the
European software industry competitiveness by enabling software c
ompanies to deliver
services or
web applications knowing that they can be used

more efficiently and more rapidly
such that their
end customers can make more money
.





From the
research perspective
, many of complex research challenges need to be solved as pa
rt
of the project. This leads to high
-
quality research publications and will advance the state of the art
in the area this field.

SMASH
-
ITEA

will bring together both, the latest European research results
by including leading academic experts of this domai
n as well as several real
-
world companies
allowing to formulate theories and research results.



For

Users
,
SMASH
-
ITEA

will leverage from both the above bullets and h
ence, companies will
benefit from
SMASH
-
ITEA

results which are proven to be the latest stat
e
-
of
-
the art in research
results as well as bullet
-
proof concepts for real world applications.


Once,
SMASH
-
ITEA

is
established
, it does not need additional affords or cost intensive changes of
existing business processes. It will therefore lead to long
-
te
rm benefits fostering the collaboration
between
Users and Business,
European
Individuals, and Companies
.

The
SMASH
-
ITEA

user will
become a true prosumer
.
SMASH
-
ITEA

therefore expect
s

a high distribution and a high accept
ance
rate of
SMASH
-
ITEA
, especially with citizens and
small and medium sized enterprises throughout
Europe.

This means that the market opportunities for deployment of
SMASH
-
ITea

are quite unlimited


Considering the
overall nature of the consortium the
domain/partner opportuniti
es
ca
n also be
documented as follows
. NB S
pecific partner exploitation
s are

presented in section

2.5.2
.


Target

Domain

Partner

End Users

High
-
Tech
Industrial

Philips

Barcelo

Eteration

Application
Providers

Software/ SaaS
Companies

TIE

Answare

Media Intl

Horizon
s

Solution Providers/
Consultants

Atos Origin

Eteration

Industrial ICT

Philips

Service Providers

Telecommunications / ICT

Telefonica

Researchers/ Universities

Twente

Cairo/FCI

UPM


Beyond the project parties the consortium has made approaches to other parties which have shown
great interest in
SMASH
-
ITea

and would like to be directly involved but due to limitations of ITEA2
participation/funding or existing commitments

this is not possible. Still it is expected that many will
participate from or far or in an advisory capacity

and with named individuals provisionally agreeing to
participa
t
e in the
SMASH
-
ITea

advisory board (M
arket “Advisor”)
.


Company

Responsible

WebSite

Notes

Alinari

(IT)

Andrea de Polo

www.alinari.it/

Wo
r
lds olds photo archive

Alibaba

(CN)

Zhixiong Yang

www.alibab.com

Worlds largest Trade Shop

eBay

(US)

Paul Strong

-

Advisor

www.ebay.com

Worlds largest Auction
Site/Shop

MXData

(UK)

Michael Cliffe

www.mxdata.co.uk/

Mobile/Data Content
Aggregation




Proposal Part B: page
13

of
85

Fraunhofer
Fokus

Carsten Jacob

-

Advisor

mylab.fokus.fraunhofer.de/

Institute for Open
Communication Systems

City University
London, UK
University

Professor Neil
Maiden

www.city.ac.uk


The UK's centre of
excellence for Human
-
Computer Interaction and
Services

I
-
SOFT OOD


Irena Pavlov
a
-

-

Advisor

www.isoft
-
technology.com

SME
Technology provider
with expertise in
interoperable frameworks
and services

Seekda GmbH


Michal Zaremba


seekda.com


Austrian based
International e
-
Commerce
technology
and services
provider

iSR.eu

Francesco Ruffino

-

Advisor

Ict
-
sme.eu

ICT SME Research
Europe. Not profit ICT
SME Research Network

Il Sole 24 ORE
S.p.A.

Andrea Gianotti

www.ilsole24ore.com/

Italian leading economic
and financial newspaper
and news website
.

Thales

Pascal Bisson

www.thalesgroup.com/

Mission Critical Systems


2.3.

Technical and strategic relevance

(relevance for software
-
intensive systems)


2.3.1.

Technolog
y

state
-
of
-
the
-
art

Describe the
current technological situation

in the project domain (both
research state
-
of
-
the
-
art

and
industrial products
). For the research state
-
of
-
the
-
art,
also
document how your project relates to
and/or builds
on results
7
of, and differentiates from, other (past or running) cooperative (e.g. IST
,
ITEA
8
, ARTEMIS

or nationa
l) projects or national ICT clusters tackling related issues (we recommend
that
the PO provides a table with, for each of such projects or national ICT clusters, a short description
thereof focusing on the aspects related to your project and a short descri
ption of how your project
relates to and/or builds on, and differentiates from, it). Present the starting technological base of the
project (starting technologies and their main suppliers).


This § should enable to answer to the following question:



Is th
e technology state
-
of
-
the
-
art (including technical background) adequately described?


Generic SOTA

The term Mashup stems from the music domain. There, Mashups are two or more different tracks that
are remixed into a new recording. The first well
-
known example is the Grey Album, a remix of The
Beatles’ White Album and Jay
-
Z’s Black Album
Error! Reference source not found.
. In the Web
omain, Mashups are a relatively new type of phenomenon. Therefore, research still has to agree upon
a common definition. Nevert
heless, there is a broad consensus that Mashups combine or aggregate
multiple services or sources to create a
new composite Web application.


For example Ort, Brydon and Basler use this basic definition in their articles
[1]
[3]

as well as Cetin
[4]

and Novak and Voigt
[5]
. Jin and Lee add that this combination of services is done at runtime
[6]
.
Merril states in his often cited article
[6]

that Mashups are “unusual or innovative compositions” that
are “entirely
new and innovative services” and “made for human (rather than computerized)
consumption”. Gartner refers to Mashups as “a lightweight tactical integration of multi
-
sourced
applications or content into a single offering”
[7]
.

Eventually, Websites are organized in a more
componentized manner, where application logic can be accomplished in the browser as well as on the
servers
Error! Reference source not found.
.


T
he core characteristics of Mashups can be summarized as follows:




Mashups are user
-
centric, i.e. they focus on needs and desires of users and the community



Mashups are Web
-
based, i.e. sources from other Web applications are leveraged



Mashups are strongly linked to the Web 2.0 paradigm Mashups are lightweight.




Proposal Part B: page
14

of
85



The presentation of data plays a major role in Mashup development.


Mashups are a relatively new a
nd lightweight kind of web application.
Most well
-
known are
c
onsumer
Mashups being also in the main focus of
SMASH
-
ITea

, which are mostly based on Web
-
technologies,
consumer centric, and strongly linked to the Web 2.0 paradigm defined by Tim O’Reilly. A
s a second
category, Enterprise Mashups (also known as Data Mashups) cover a wider range of functionality.
Enterprise Mashups include a broader range of services, sources and data including databases, text
-
fi
les, CSV data (Character/Comma sepa
rated Values)

and data formats such as PDF, Excel and
others and aim to be integrated into Service
-

Oriented Architectures
[8]
.

Derived from Merrill
[6]

and
Jin and Lee
[6]

Consumer Mashups can preliminary be divided as follows. The categories ar
e not
mutually exclusive, combinati
ons of several ones are common:




Mapping Mashups or Geo
-
Mashups




Timeline Mashups




Video and Photo Mashups




Search and Shopping Mashups




Customer
-
interface Mashups




News and Content Structuring Mashup
.


There are
many

fra
meworks in the Web, which deal with Mashups. They are mentioned in the
following to complete the view of approaches, which deal with Mashup creation and execution.
However they
all
offer primary a graphical editor generating code to be executed in the Web
browser.

Examples include:




Yahoo! Pipes



Sharable Code, formerly known as Swashup



DAMIA



Google Web Toolkit including Google Mashup Editor, Google Mapplets, Google Tools



Kapow Robosuite



Openkapow



Dapper



WSO2 Mashup Server



Data Mashups


Apart from specialized applications for creating mash
-
ups a number of other tools are available in the
Web, which support the manipulation of web page or combination of data. For instance, Piggy Bank is
a browser extension for Firefox that should serve as
an open source mashup platform. Here, users are
able to extract information from different sites and mash it together to create a new application. This is
normally achieved by manually describing the way existing web pages are parsed for desired
informatio
n to extract and link it accordingly. These descriptions can then be exchanged among users
being interested in the respective application.


Chickenfoot is another example for a Firefox extension and focuses on the manipulation of web
pages. Here, small sc
ripts written by users are executed whenever a particular web page is loaded. As
an exemplary use case, images of existing web pages can be exchanged automatically in this way. A
platform exists to let developers share their scripts.


Aggregated from sever
al sources, the following technologies form the foundation for Mashup:



HyperText Markup Language (HTML
)
.



Representational State Transfer (REST):

REST is an architecture style for distributed systems
in general.



ECMAScript and JavaScript:

JavaScript is a
scripting language that is primarily used for Web
development and is based on the ECMAScript standard
Error! Reference source not found.
.



Asynchronous JavaScript a
nd XML (Ajax):

Ajax is not a specific technology but rather a
concept that comprises several technologies to achieve a seamless and interactive Web



Proposal Part B: page
15

of
85

experience.



Syndication
-

RSS and Atom:




JavaScript Object Notation (with Padding)
-

JSON and JSONP
: JSON is

a built
-
in feature of
JavaScript that allows the literal notation of objects in programs



Web Application Description Language (WADL):

WADL is an XML
-
based format that can be
used to describe Web applications in a platform independent manner
Error! Reference source
ot found.
. It was created to provide machine processable descriptions of HTTP
-
based Web
applications, typically REST services.



Screen Scraping:

Screen
scraping is a parsing technique to extract and analyze data from public
Websites that do not offer public interfaces
[6]
.



Semantic Web and related technologies:

The

Semantic Web “is the vision that the existing Web
can be augmented to supplement the content designed for humans with equivalent machine
-
readable information”


The drawback of the above have been largely identified in

2.1


General goals


and includes th
eir
aim at
technologists and not users
, r
estricted use of context data

centralisation, no semantic
interoperability, complexity for SMEs and the over time involved. This has let to the fact that
according to the recognised Seekda! Crawler there are only 3
0,000 formalised webservices today.

SMASH
-
ITea

will change this.


Research

Projects

In terms of research projects there are multiple projects dealing with
the
many aspects of service
s

but
the project

will focus on 3 projects which form a foundation for
SMASH
-
ITea

and then identify
some other RTD projects, primarily in IST, which will be of value:


Program /
Project

Situation

SMASH
-
ITea


Base Technologies
& IPR

Primary


Reuse/Innovation


IST/FP6


STASIS

STASIS , recently completed,
in
which TIE is partners, provides
concepts, mechanisms, and tools
that support information mapping
using semantics by offering a
workbench to create, reutilise and
form semantic pathways storing
information on an open P
2P
federated repository in a B2B
business document context.

Similar to
SMASH
-
ITea

the STASIS project
relies on semantics for data annotation and
storage.
SMASH
-
ITea

intends to extend the
STASIS approach of mapping data towards
web services in terms of mash
-
ups as well as
context
-
aware principles. Hence, the
combination of STASIS concepts and
mechanisms with current mashup activities of
SMASH
-
ITea

partners.

OWL, RDF, S
parQL
,
WSDL


Full LGPL Open
source from pr
o
ject


STASIS Template
definitions

ITEA2


DiY Smart
Experiences

The DiY SE project is attempting to
enable people to direct their
everyday environment into a highly
personalized meaningful
communication/interaction
experience that can span the home
and city domains. The project aims to
create a sustainable marketplace for
user
-
generated application
(components) in which
nontechnically
-
skilled people can
participate.

DiYSE aims at providing a

full adaptable
execution platform, which would be able to
change applications execution according to
the environment context, such as user
profiles, sensors inputs, pre
-
defined users’
requirements, introduction of new devices in
the environment, etc. In D
iYSE, a
mechanism will be defined for managing the
context and use it for modifying application
executions or launching new functionalities
when necessary.
SMASH
-
ITea can benefit
from the context
-
aware issues addressed
by
DiYSE as new services will pop up
depending, e.g. on the current context of
the user.

TONNY



ITEA 2


UsiXML

The UsiXML project is developing an
innovative model
-
driven language to
simplify and improve user interface
design for the benefit of both
consumer and industrial end
-
users. It
will provide particular benefits for
industry in term of productivity,
usability and accessibility by
supporting the ‘μ7’ concept of
The models and declarat
ive languages
developed by UsiXML to facilitate the
development of web interfaces can potentially
simplify the task of SMASH. The actual
specification of the structure and functionality
of the interface in a declarative and
unambiguous way can help SMASH e
xtract
the parts that the user is interested in,
decoupling easily the functionality from the
UsiXML
specification
lan
guage and
related models.


To be defined what
SW components
might be relevant.
UsiXML intends to



Proposal Part B: page
16

of
85

multiple device, user,
culture/language, organisation,
context, modality and platform
applications.

interfaces. This potentially beneficial
relationship between the two projects will be
evaluated and possible explored during the
project.

deliver with Open
Source: Apache or
LGPL

IST/FP7


SOA4All

SOA4All is a Large
-
Scale Integrating
Project (Atos, TIE) that focuses on
the development of
framework that
coherently integrates the vast variety
of services in the Web into a domain
independent service delivery
platform. Basic aspects that are
considered for this purpose are, for
example, semantics, context
information, or SOA principles.

SOA4Al
l will provide concepts and
technologies for accessing, combining, and
annotating services. As
SMASH
-
ITea

also
targets web services for the seamless creation
of mashups it will base its infrastructure on the
results of SOA4All and can benefit from the
deve
loped tools.

WSDL

WSMO, WSMO
-
Lite,
MicroWSMO

RDF

Ajax, GWT, ExtGWT
(for UI)


Spanish
National


Morfeo
EzWeb

Morfeo EzWeb (Spanish National
Project) (Telefonica) aims to deliver
and create an open source reference
implementation of standard
technologies for the front
-
end web
access layer in next
-
generation SOA
and the future Internet of Services
that is based on
the following
principles: End
-
users must feel fully
empowered, they must be able to
self
-
serve from a wide range of
available resources; Active
participation of users has to be
enabled.

Relationship to
SMASH
-
ITea
:
SMASH
-
ITea
and Morfeo EzWeb are pursui
ng the same
goal but focus seen from different starting
points. EzWeb is mainly dealing with the
problem of how to compose those elementary
applications (gadgets) at the front
-
end but is
not dealing with the creation of these gadgets,
assuming that develop
ers will do it, or other
tools will provide it.

Morfeo EzWeb
Mashup platform as
target for SMASH
-
IT
gadgets and
mashups.


All the core platform
is available as Affero
GPL.


Secondary


Re
-
use


IST/FP7

FAST

Context aware visual Programming
Environment

Extraction of information to develop services

Fast gadget
development tool for
non
-
programmers.
Available as GPL.

IST/FP7

NEXOF
-
RA


Holistic Service Architecture
promoted by ETP NESSI

Overall architectural services framework

N/A General
Architecture

IST/FP6

SEAMLESS

SRRN
-

Federated P2P repository

Open template storage

LGPL


体 mOm
oepos楴oryX oac

IST/FP7

HERA

Web Information Systems

Project
ion

of information for user

RDF

IST/FP7

ROMULUS

MDA and RESTful APIs

Service interaction

API Definitions







Proposal Part B: page
17

of
85


2.3.2.

I
nnovation

Clearly explain the
progress and innovation

proposed by your project, with
reference to the current

technology state
-
of
-
the
-
art
.


For software
-

or system
-
engineering related activities,
provide measurable and quantified objectives

(e.g. cost

savings, productivity and/or quality improvements, number of users and/or impact on users)

and
explain how the measurements will be implemented
.

For projects having software
-

or system
-
engineering related activities,
it is compulsory to update/extend,

in
the course of the project, the
software
-

or system
-
engineering

related state
-
of the art provided in the

FPP.


This § should enable to answer to the following question:



Is the project innovative enough
, and is this innovation adequately described?



Are t
he objectives of software
-

or system
-
engineering related activities
clearly quantified and is it

explained how results will be measured
?



(For projects having software
-

or system
-
engineering related activities) Is
it planned to

update/extend, in the
course of the project
, the FPP software
-

or system
-
engineering related

state
-
of the art provided in the FPP and to make it a
Public Deliverable?


Is
SMASH
-
ITea

innovative? The answer is clear


the functionality does NOT exist today
, but
everyone, user or
technologist, who has seen the
SMASH
-
ITea

concept as animated slideware
(
http://coconut.tie.nl/
SMASH
-
ITea

-
submitted
.
ppt)
has understood it, recognised its impact and bought
into the idea

and can see how it is derived from the research prototypes currently

available
. Why?
Because the things that
SMASH
-
ITea

eludes to
,

is exactly what the community of web users want
to do today but can

t.



However, it should be clear that

SMASH
-
ITea

is an extremely
focused

highly
innovative

project with
a very clear and
t
angible outcome
. It is not abstract or murky and the RTD performed will produce
clear results

that will strongly go beyond what is possible today or even imagined



SMASH
-
ITea

will be
a milestone in the domain of software & services
.


As such
SMASH
-
ITea

has already attractive great interest;
SMASH
-
ITea

has engaged
Barcelo and
Philips

as
user partners


and w
ho
m

operate in the fields of
Travel

and
Consumer Electronics

and
whom will pilot use cases in the Future Internet domains of
Internet of Content

and
In
ternet of
Things

respectively. In addition partner
TIE
, who will also perform RTD, will enact their use case
connected with
eBusiness

and the Internet of
Services
.
Finally it will engage

focus groups relating
to
High School, Seniors an
d “Middle
-
Aged lagg
ards”

the project will ensure real user engagement


though the
Internet of People/Users.


The
SMASH
-
ITea

project’s innovation lies in the area of

Services. More precisely,
SMASH
-
ITea

will
provide highest innovation in creating, using and combining service
s.


Services can be defined in many different ways. From a technical point of view, services can be
considered as webServices or RESTful services. WebServices have been around since over 10 years
now and unfortunately, not much has changed within the last
10 years in terms of services. Obviously
new standards have been developed and huge amounts of money and research has been invested to
provide new concepts and tools for developing and using services. However, looking at real world
metrics it has to be st
ated that none of those efforts has been successful. Looking at the SEEKDA
web service search engine


the largest service search engine in the world
-

it can be seen that only
28.451 true webservices are existing in the web
7
. Compared to other
technologies, this is surprisingly
low. For example, syndic8.com lists 20 times more RSS feeds.


It is widely accepted that there are two main reasons that hinder the uptake of services: The first one
is the relatively complicated provision and composition

of services which usually needs a skilled
developer. The second one is the usage of services which is basically not possible for non
-
developers.





7

Source: www.seekda.com




Proposal Part B: page
18

of
85

Recently, a lot of research has been invested into creating so called Mashup solutions that help
developers a
nd users to make it easier to combine services into processes and to execute them.
Good examples for those approaches are Yahoo Pipes, the ezWeb Mashup editor and the SOA4All
composition editor. However, again the web of services did not evolve yet. Althou
gh the usage and
combination of services is now easy, the real
-
world applicability is limited to almost zero because
those platforms can obviously only combine services that have been added to the Mashup platform
before and that have been technically prepa
red and connected. This limitation has lead to low interest
in real
-
world applications. A consequence can already be seen in the example of Microsoft who closed
their Mashup platform Microsoft Popfly earlier this year.


This situation
hinders
the uptake of

the Internet of Services



it’s an unsolved problem since over 10
years without a hope to change in the near future.


SMASH
-
ITea

will finally change this.

SMASH
-
ITea

is the first project that takes the user as a central point for all research in this area
.
SMASH
-
ITea

makes the creation, composition and the usage of services as simple as possible
without requiring any technical expertise. Users may visit normal websites and then simply drag &
drop them together.


For example, they may visit a weather fore
cast website and drag it to another browser tab of a hotel
booking website. This is where
SMASH
-
ITea

comes into the game:
SMASH
-
ITea

will now
automatically analyze the two websites and create services out of them (smart service recognition). It
will then c
ombine those services and make them interoperable (service composition). The users will
see nothing from this “magic” behind the scenes. The only thing that they will notice is a small popup
window asking them “Dear User, you want to connect weather.com to

hotel.com. Which is the criteria
that you want to define?”. It will offer the user some choices and the user may select to use the
“temperature > 30°C” as a criteria for the hotel booking search.
SMASH
-
ITea

will then execute the
composed services and sho
w the results of the hotel search to the user.


Obviously,
SMASH
-
ITea

will have massive impact to the way services are used, composed and
developed. Service developers will basically disappear as their services will be extracted from their
web applications

automatically. All they have to do is that they may (or may not) support the process
by adding some semantic annotations to their website but even this will be an optional step.

Service composition will be performed automatically by the user using drag &
drop. This will be as
simple as dragging one folder into another in order to move it and users are very familiar with this.

Service use will be performed by
SMASH
-
ITea

which might ask user some non technical questions.
Users may also see ratings, comments

and other social interactions about the service and about the
websites that they are connecting.


It will
innovate in the areas of
:



S
ervice front ends

As of today, services are combined in two different ways: Either, developers use a technical
environment (i.e. a code editor) or they use a services composition / process editor such as
one of the many mashup editors that have been developed in the past. G
ood examples are
the SOA4All process editor, Yahoo Pipes and the ezWeb Mashup editor. Those frontends are
nice but they are light
-
years away from reality. This is because they require users to either
restrict themselves to services that are already Mashup/
web service enabled or they require
deep technical knowledge to create services.
SMASH
-
ITea

will make this different and will
bring true innovation into service front ends. It will allow users to convert every website in the
web to a service without even h
aving to touch a single line of code and without waiting for
SMASH
-
ITea

developers to wrap the website. All they have to do is to install
SMASH
-
ITea

,
visit their website and drag & drop things together. No other steps are required.



Higher user empowerment

Users are the key in
SMASH
-
ITea

.
SMASH
-
ITea

is clearly built from a
user centric

view as it
wants to solve a very practical problem of combining real services that can be found on
websites. The truth is that users do not want to care about web services a
nd things like



Proposal Part B: page
19

of
85

WSDL, UDDI, WSMO, etc. Instead of this, users want solutions. They want to be able to drag
their weather site to their hotel booking site without opening a Mashup editor and without
waiting until someone writes a wrapper to the websites that

they want to combine. Users just
want to drag & drop things together and to see the results on their screen.
SMASH
-
ITea

will
provide a solution for making this true, empowering the user of making use of all facets of the
web with absolutely zero knowledge

of technology needed.



More advanced and dynamic online co
mmunities

SMASH
-
ITea

will support social aspects by allowing users to rate, comment and discuss
services on the one hand and by providing a space to share service information and combined
services o
n the other hand through its recommendation system. As such,
SMASH
-
ITea

will
create a social community effect which will in turn increase the usage of services in general
and
SMASH
-
ITea

in specific.


This innovation thus impacts as follows:



Software Impact

SMASH
-
ITEA

will rapidly change the view on how services will be seen and used by European
citizens. Services will move from an abstract and technical term towards an essential part of web
applications and software in general.
SMASH
-
ITEA

will allow users to combine websites and their
services in a very easy and highly practical way. As such,
SMASH
-
ITEA

will transform the web
from isolated islands of pages that are only passively
interlinked

to a web of connected pages
that are actively
int
eracting
.


SMASH
-
ITEA

will therefore allow the creation of additional value for software as a website will be
of more value if it interacts with other websites and is used in context with other software.
SMASH
-
ITEA

will directly impact the way users use so
ftware on the web by leveraging global SOA trend
through user
-
cantered flavour to the Software as a Service (SaaS) technologies.


SMASH
-
ITEA

will also be usable by other software components and in fact
SMASH
-
ITEA

will be
openly accessible.
SMASH
-
ITEA

will
expose major component functionalities as services. The
different parts of
SMASH
-
ITEA

may be reused in other software projects and may be re
-
combined
or extended to easy the software development process for future projects.



Service Impact

Obviously
SMASH
-
I
TEA

will have a huge impact to services from a technical perspective. As of
today, services are created by developers using IDEs such as Eclipse or Visual studio. They are
then described and published (e.g. via WSDL) and sometimes semantically annotated (e
.g. via
WSMO).


SMASH
-
ITEA

will change it by creating services automatically from website content. As such,
developers do no longer have to use specific service creation libraries. Instead of this, they may
concentrate on developing their web application
and may lease the service aspect to
SMASH
-
ITEA

. They may, however, support
SMASH
-
ITEA

by adding some semantic key worlds and
markup to their HMTL content when creating their web application.




Federation/Network Impact

Sharing is the buzzword of today whether it be on Facebook or mySpace or your ideas and
thoughts on twitter. What is not yet shared are services. By using the SRRN to federate services,
just like those social sites provide
SMASH
-
ITEA

can provide addition
al services (recommendation,
template retrieval etc) to network
-
in a federated community of users. The effect of social sites and
mass
-
use is clear.
SMASH
-
ITEA

can have the same impact.


At another level, the increasing traffic caused by transferred medi
a content sometimes becomes a
serious issue for the Internet Service Providers (ISP) because their infrastructures are not ready
for this intensive flow.
SMASH
-
ITEA

will make a negative effect on traffic, i.e. it will allow
decreasing it to some extent bec
ause users will be able to utilize
SMASH
-
ITEA

assets
simultaneously, in an appropriate format adjusted to their network and device capabilities which is



Proposal Part B: page
20

of
85

particularly pertinent for mobile devices.




Semantics Impact

The
SMASH
-
ITEA

project is related to seman
tic web activities and, thus, will use and build upon
the upcoming ontology language standards developed in this context, W3C Resource Description
Framework (RDF), which is in Recommendation status, and W3C Web Ontology language OWL,
which builds upon RDF
and is in Recommendation status too. For service annotations a new
powerful emerging language The developed ontology language will be used by different
applications, will permit the management of different kinds of data models (structured, semi
-
structured,

textual, multimedia) required for the project and to represent the metadata: semantic
annotations of services, sources metadata, and the data sources themselves.




Semantics Impact

SMASH
-
ITEA

can contribute to the adoption of Internet of Things applications. In a first step,
SMASH
-
ITEA

can help end
-
user to mash
-
up services with their personal devices capabilities,
such as mobile
-
phone, IPod, etc. These terminals can be the way to interact with
the user, that is
to say the input for the mash
-
ups (using different modes, such as voice recognition, text, etc.). But
beyond the input, the device can be the way to capture the context, thanks notably to geo
-
localization, availability in the user’s cale
ndar or other personal information. Then the mash
-
up can
integrate other devices such as RFID tags, smart devices (cashier, subway gate, etc.) to interact
with the environment and realize a first step the internet of things for end
-
users.


Finally
SMASH
-
I
TEA

will provide a significant innovation impact in the area of standards
. This is
document
ed in the dissemination section.


SMASH
-
ITea

: Primary Objectives and Metrics

Matrix

Based on
the above,
SMASH
-
ITea

sets itself the following metrics related to its

primary objectives and
work packages of the project.


Objective

Metric

Work Package

To manage the project according to
sound project management
principles and to deliver to the EU /
Partner clients, by all partners, the
expected contracted items



㤵┠%i琠
r慴攠ef‱ 琠t慳s⁡ c数瑡tc攠潦
摥liv敲慢l敳



乯⁦畬l⁲敪散ti潮s



乯⁳ig湩fic慮琠䍁/䍯湴r慣琠tis灵t敳
敳c慬慴a搠do⁢ 慲a

WPㄺ1Pr潪散琠
m慮慧敭敮琠t湤
Q畡lity Ass畲慮ue

T漠or潶id攠eh攠e畳i湥ss⁡n搠
瑥t桮ical⁦潵n摡ti潮⁦潲⁴桥⁰牯 散t



WP㤠9慬id慴a潮⁡湤 畳攠eas
敳⁣潮f潲m
慧ai湳琠tri杩湡l⁲敱畩r敭敮瑳


㠰┠
Ec桡湧攠eo湴牯nF



䑥杲敥D潦⁣潲o散瑮tss 物杩湡l⁶isio渠
慮搠慮y⁣潮flic瑳⁡ isi湧



䍯C敲慧e⁩n⁴ e⁓OTA ⁴ 攠e散h湯l潧i敳
i渠nr慣tic攠⡵e敦畬n敳s)

WP2: Vision,
Market,
Requirements &
SOTA


To provide a tec
hnical architectural
and functional specification



䍯桥si潮 扥t睥敮⁍ ㈠2n搠d3㘠
s灥cific慴ao湳



A灰lica扩lity 潦⁦畮c瑩潮al⁤敳i杮 瑯t
灲慣瑩c慬 慳灥c瑳



Acc数瑡tce⁡ 搠ds攠潦⁴ 攠慵瑯扵il搠
敮vir潮m敮t

WP㌺3
Arc桩瑥tt畲攬u
S灥cific慴io測n
䥮I敧ra瑩on

T漠
r散潧湩s攠e湤⁳敲vice
-
e湡bl敤
i湦潲o慬⁡ 搠d潲m慬⁳敲eices⁦rom
睥扳it敳Ⱐ,p灬ic慴a潮s⁡湤 摥vic敳



䵩nim慬⁨ m慮⁩湴敲ee湴n潮⁤ rin朠
r散潧湩tio渠nr潣敳s



䵩nim慬⁨ m慮⁩湴敲ee湴n潮⁷桥n⁵ in朠
r散潧湩se搠d敲eic敳⁩渠n畢s敱略n琠
灲潣敳s敳



E慳攠ef⁵ 攺e啳敤 by
湯n 數灥r瑳



S灥敤 ⁲散潧湩tion



Pr潶敮⁴漠w潲o⁷ 瑨t㄰⁦潲o慬⁳敲eic敳…
㔠5湦潲o慬 敳 ⁰ rt湥rsⰠ,
WP㐺4S敲eic攠
剥R潧nis攠&
A畴u扵il搠
䥮I敧ra瑩on




Proposal Part B: page
21

of
85

applications, 2 devices and 10 non
partner services

To provide resources for the
following relatively d
isparate
aspects: Federated storage and
retrieval, Service Templates for
common applications, Service
Memory for reutilising of previous
information, and utilities Semantic
Interoperability and wiring of
Services.



Ability to store any information asset
gen
erated from
SMASH
-
ITEA




Support of 2 external device formats
including iPod and PDAs



Support of 4 popular applications iTunes,
MS Outlook Calendar, and MS Excel for
results’ export



Ability to recognise service semantics and
wire them together at a basic
level with
minimal human intervention

WP5: Mashup
Resources

To enable a personalized and
context dependent adaptation of
“smashed” services as well as
recommendations for “smashable”
services to share successful service
combinations. This involves
servic
es input, processing and
output phases.



Minimal human intervention and reduced
time for the adaptation processes



Range and kind of context information
included


at least 4 industry sectors, 2
device types



Quality of the recommendations and
adaptation in t
erms of experienced
subjective satisfaction (means: user trials,
feedback, surveys) as well as of the
privacy aspects


at least 75% score

WP6: Adaptation,
Context, and
Personalization

To reconstruct recognised services
into one service frontend and a
com
posite service definition using
drag and drop modality, advanced
HCI patterns, context and taking
advantage of already
-
stored
templates / service mashups.



Proven to produce a front end with 5
combinations of 2 services, 3 combination
of 2 services and 1 of

4 services



Proven to produce a front end containing
a web service, website
-
based service
one, application and device and deliver to
a device and as a desktop front end



Correctness of the mash up result and
reconstruction process in terms of user
expectat
ion and quality of the result
-

1:1
results between the
SMASH
-
ITEA

process and as if the user has performed
all the above manually

WP7: Service
Front End
Reconstruction


To integrate the results from WP4
-
7
into one coherent suite, control the
process exe
cution, and to provide
proper monitoring and
administration facilities.



Desired
SMASH
-
ITEA

functionality is
integrated into one system; the prototype
is ready for evaluation and demonstration



Administration and monitoring of the
system is possible



The main

metric here will be the feedback
from WP9

WP8:
Housekeeping &
Management


To ensure that the RTD developed
by
SMASH
-
ITEA

, through WP2
-
8 is
‘fit for purpose’ and demonstratable
to others


i.e. Verified, Validated
through 4 uses cases and
Demonstrated



4
external users, at least, participating in
user trials (via ISR)



5
-
10 participants in each of the four focus
group



75% feedback average and above

WP9: Use Cases,
Verification, Pilot
and
Demonstration


To disseminate the project
outcomes intensively and
e
xtensively addressing the proper
audience through different channels
and material and to ensure there is
a clear policy for IPR/Exploitation
post
-
project



General Dissemination



2 workshops help with around 50
-
100 participants at each



6 newsletters published

with a real
subscriber base of >100



4 participants in each yearly EU
cluster event



3 meetings per year with other
projects



50% of partners make press
releases

WP10: Impact,
Dissemination,
Discussion,
Exploitation





Proposal Part B: page
22

of
85



4 participations, at least, in
standardization efforts



25% growth in website traffic year
-
on
-
yea
r



Scientific Dissemination



5 Academic papers, at least,
accepted


one related to each RTD
WP



Each academic/research institute
has at least one paper accepted and
scientific coordinator has 2



2 papers, at least, accepted led by
industrial partners



3 engage
ment
s

of 4 external domain
experts


2.4.

Major visible expected results

List the
concrete major results of your project (max 3
): demonstrations, standards, theoretical results,

deliverables ...

The project

must focus on a limited number (max. 3) of important issues.

This § should enable to answer to the following question:



Are the concrete final results and their expected impact clearly described and credible?


SMASH
-
ITea
Primary Results will be the fo
llowing:



Production of a modular open tool kit which will allow non
-
technical users to turn websites in
to services and for them to wire these generate services to each other and popular devises
and applications forming new services



Contribution of the
(op
en source) technologies,
methodologies and specifications (in fact all
SMASH
-
ITea

technical deliverables are open) to the public environment

to create maximum
im
pact. This includes where possible European Standards Workshop agreements related to
the techno
logies and possibly forming a workshop around this (CEN CWAs)



As systems
are
promoted as being for real users and not
technicians
,

to involve users and the
external world through maximum interactions including
validations
, classical workshops, new
letters
forums but also 4 focus groups (Seniors, High
-
School, ‘middle
-
ag
ed laggard
s’,
‘international) and an external advisory board
as previously advised
.




In addition the project will have clear focused objectives

and metrics as listed in the previous
section.


2.5.

Dissemination

and Exploitation

of Results

2.5.1.

Dissemination

Define, with a special attention to the
standardisation aspects
, a
dissemination strategy

consistent with

the project and document its implementation, i.e. how the project results will be disseminated

(conferences, publications …) in the course of the project.



A number of dissemination activities are foreseen. These will start at the beginning of the project and
will be continued and intensified at the end of the project together with expansive explo
itation
strategies. The activities
aim at
:




Assuring a
strong cooperation among the consortium partners

to guarantee an efficient
communication inside the project



Assuring the most and effective communication output of the research activities and outputs to the
interested scientific and industrial communities
, including customers and business partners of
the consortium members




Proposal Part B: page
23

of
85



Interacting with
EU initiatives

such as

projects, clusters and European Technology Platforms

particularly in the Software and Services field (i.e.
FP7 ICT
Objective 1.2 new and current
projects)



Interacting with the
Standardisation community

or similar fora

such as W3C, CEN, OASIS, or
Service
Front End Alliance



Gaining the support and commitment

of key people in the topic

involved by informing and involving
software developers and vendors, application service providers and other
similar market actors



Establishing links with
related initiatives

that will enrich the project content and development
providing a reciprocal feedback for a better knowledge sharing and management.


The dissemination plan will covers

knowledge transfer, facilitating the transfer of information and
knowledge gathered in
the project activities and results to the different stakeholders mainly in Europe
but also in non
European

countries and will
involve the following dissemination types:



Scientific dissemination

will start in the first half of the project when dissemination

of information
about the project will remain limited to the distribution of publishable abstracts
but d
uring the
second half of the project it is intended to publish different articles in international scientific and
trade magazines/journals.

M
ost of the

scientific dissemination a
ctivities will be faced by the
u
niversities and research institutes within the consortium
.



Industrial dissemination
will be the most critical part of the dissemination phase because of the
relevance to address SMEs and other part
ies directly and to ensure technical take up by
competitive players. w



Public dissemination
: For a wide generic dissemination,
SMASH
-
ITea

will have its own website
with information about the
SMASH
-
ITea

results including components, formats, processes and
test bed applications, public deliverables, IST and other EU and non EU projects in general and
the possibilities for companies to liaise with
SMASH
-
ITea


Dissemination Methods



Community:
Thus
SMASH
-
ITea

will establish a community
, based around the
workshops,

advisors, focus groups and newsletters

which will consist of several different types of actors that
are positioned along the
SMASH
-
ITea

Value Chain. These
range

from ‘competing’ research or
academic institutions to industry actors to potential d
eployers and users of the
SMASH
-
ITea

technology and solutions. As part of this,
SMASH
-
ITea

will also invest in around
4

specific experts
for their ‘paid’ outside view on, and interaction with,
SMASH
-
ITea

on a formal basis.



Workshops:
An interim (end year
2) and a final (end year 3) workshop is planned

with the
following
expectation
:



Workshops
will be
held in 2 different partner states.

Workshops will be
minimal
one
-
day in
length with a localized and fixed programme made relevant to the area.

However,
SMA
SH
-
ITEA

will straight away interact with other projects and propose a more general event
structured like
www.semanticweek.eu