Admin Status
ID Name
Country
LOI
1
TIE
Stuart
Twente
Egon
Phillips
Kees
NL - Lead
Admin/XLS
Details
Done/Have
Exploit
Done/Have
Org
Profile
Done/Have
NL
Done/Have
Done/Have
Done/Have
Yes
NL
Founder –
Don’t need
Done/Have
SC TO
CHECK
???
Telefonica
Nik
ATOS
German
ES - Lead
By 24/03
Done/Have
Done/Have
Yes
ES
Done/Have
Done/Have
Done/Have
Yes
ES
Done/Have
???
ES
Done/Have
SC TO
CHECK
Done/Have
Done/Have
7
Answare
Tonny
UPM
Done/Have
Yes
8
Barcelo
ES
Done/Have
Done/Have
Yes
9
10
11
12
13
Horizons
FCI
Media Intl
Eteration
AzaharSC
Alaa
MANTIS
Aydin
Turkey3
EG - Lead
EG
EG
TK
EG
Mailed
german
22/03
Done/Have
???
???
???
???
Done/Have
Done/Have
Done/Have
???
Part Have
Done/Have
???
???
???
???
Yes
Yes
Yes
???
???
TK
???
???
???
???
TK
TK NCP
Ezgi Bener
[ezgi.bener@tubitak.gov.tr]
???
???
???
???
2
3
4
5
6
14
15
MM
Yes
50
PM.
54
MM
to
72
MM
Ms. Betul Macit
EG NCP
Yousra Mohamed Sabry
[ysabry@itida.gov.eg]
Sally Metwally Mohamed
Page 1 of 85
Based on the ITEA 2 PO template v5.0 (Jan. 2010)
Project Outline
SMASH-ITea
Smart Mash-Up
••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Edited by:
Date:
Document version no.:
Stuart Campbell
2010-03-03
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 2 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 3 of 85
Table of Contents
1.
Project summary ........................................................................................................................... 6
1.1. ACRONYM and full-length title ............................................................................................... 6
1.2. Abstract ................................................................................................................................. 6
1.3. Project duration ...................................................................................................................... 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
Standards Impact ................................................................................................................. 24
2.5.2. Exploitation ............................................................................................................... 24
3.
Consortium overview .................................................................................................................. 29
3.1.1. Roles ........................................................................................................................ 32
3.1.2. Control Mechanisms ................................................................................................. 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. Consortium 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 not defined.
Proposal Part B: page 4 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 5 of 85
1. Project summary
1.1. ACRONYM and full-length title
SMASH-ITea – Smart Mash-Up
1.2. Abstract1
Users 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 web 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 duration2
36 Months
1.4. Positioning on the ITEA Roadmap (edition 3)3
1.4.1.
Application Domains
Major:
Minor:
1.4.2.
Me
Services and Software Creation, Group
Technology Categories
Major:
Minor 1:
Minor 2
Interaction (More than Human, Multimodal and Multi Device)
Content & Knowledge (Representation, Acquisition & Processing)
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)
NO6
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-Intensive Systems and Services (3 rd edition, February 2009) –
http://www.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 Agreement.
6
Delete YES or NO, according to the situation.
Proposal Part B: page 6 of 85
TIE
Contact person
Complete
address
Mr Stuart Campbell
Address
Antareslaan 22-24
Town
Hoofddorp
Postal code
2132 JE
Country
The Netherlands
Fix telephone
+ 31 20 658 9000
Mobile phone
+44 7970429 251
Fax
N/A
E-mail
Stuart.campbell@tieglobal.com
Proposal Part B: page 7 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 specific
problem. For this they usually want to conceptually interconnect and converge what they see and
they want to do this easily, without barriers and in network enabled ways. Without, registries,
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 moving from the dragand-drop of desktop files, to the drag-and-drop of services that are automatically generated 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 service 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 SMASHITea comes into the game: SMASH-ITea will now
automatically analyze the two websites and create
individual formalised services out of them (smart
service recognition). 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 reconstruction will be done visually
(people can see that websites are merged) and
technically (through service wiring) taking advantage
of templates, context and service memories if
available.
It needs to be explicitly stated that SMASH-ITea is a user centric visual environment 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.
External
O65
O63
O61
Context
Engine
O74
Semantic
Engine
O42
AutoGadget
O47
O610
O43
O43
Modalities
O54
O62
O71
Autobuilt
Enabled
Services
O53
Application
Device
Reconstruct
Engine
SFE of
Composed
Services
O52
O44
Template
Engine
Recommendation
Template
Memory
O64
O67
O46
O47
Security /
Privacy
O55
O51
Composed
O53
Autobuilt
enabled
Services
Templates
Device
Application
O81
O82
Customisze
Integrate
SRRN
Federated Repository
O52
Memories
Process
Management
O77
Recommend
Engine
Context
Engine
Individual
O72
O45
Website
KEY
Updates
O78
Recognition
Engine
O42
O41
O75
Format
O73
O73
Input
O55
O69
Recommendations
Individual
Composed
The SMASH-ITea high-level architecture has
already been thought through and discussed
with individual partners 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.
O83
O84
SMASH-ITea : The no-mash-up, mash-up
project
Proposal Part B: page 8 of 85
The impact and benefit of SMASH-ITea is the following:
Today
Static mashup creation process
Aimed at technologists and not users
Not considering the experience level of
the user
Restricted use of context data
Orchestration but no semantic
interoperability
Centralized access
Finding mashable services can be a
time-consuming task
Services are much hyped but little used
Difficulty of service enabling existing
functionality
Services are too complex for SMEs
Making services that are never used
Only the experts can make services
which has minimised impact
Lack of 80:20 simple to use standards
SMASH-ITea Impact
Dynamic mashup creation and adaptation
Totally user-centric service frontend with high-user
empowerment
Advantage through wisdom of crowds
recommendation/template engine
Contextual sensitivity through device and situation
awareness
Easily semantically linking services through semantic
pathways
Federated P2P open system
Sharing and reutilising existing services/mashups
Prosumer environment for services – Just do it
Making services from websites
Eliminated barriers for provider SMEs
More advanced and dynamic online communities
Offering a greater number of more reliable and affordable
services
Implementation orientated CEN standards input
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 Industries, 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. SMASHITea 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
easy 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
billion public web pages.
Proposal Part B: page 9 of 85


Flexible and resilient platforms
SMASH-ITea will be based on automatic service recognition algorithms. The algorithms 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
changes. It not, then SMASH-ITea will use the automatic service recognition algorithm again to rerecognize the service. In contrast to this, normal/traditional services fail even when small
parameter specifications change.
Technologies tailored to meet key societal and 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 automatically 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 actually 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 is 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 Analysis’
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 exploitation 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 theirs with others due to the high technical
skills needed. This is testified by the “Seekda!” figures 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
commonly 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 integration 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 increasing demand of companies 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 increasing 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 partners. 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.
Traditional 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 assumes 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 10 of 85
absolute known competitors with a similar application – 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 or 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 the 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 transparent 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 types 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 interesting 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 wider 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 providers 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-ITea 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 advantages.
Market Opportunities per partners
Proposal Part B: page 11 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 companies 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 part
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 domain 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 hence, companies will
benefit from SMASH-ITEA results which are proven to be the latest state-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-term benefits fostering the collaboration
between Users and Business, European Individuals, and Companies. The SMASH-ITEA user will
become a true prosumer. SMASH-ITEA therefore expects a high distribution and a high acceptance
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 opportunities can also be
documented as follows. NB Specific partner exploitations are presented in section 2.5.2.
Target
End Users
Domain
High-Tech Industrial
Application
Providers
Software/ SaaS
Companies
Solution Providers/
Consultants
Industrial ICT
Service Providers
Telecommunications / ICT
Researchers/ Universities
Partner
Philips
Barcelo
Eteration
TIE
Answare
Media Intl
Horizons
Atos Origin
Eteration
Philips
Telefonica
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
participate in the SMASH-ITea advisory board (Market “Advisor”).
Company
Alinari (IT)
Alibaba (CN)
eBay (US)
Responsible
Andrea de Polo
Zhixiong Yang
Paul Strong - Advisor
WebSite
www.alinari.it/
www.alibab.com
www.ebay.com
MXData (UK)
Michael Cliffe
www.mxdata.co.uk/
Proposal Part B: page 12 of 85
Notes
Worlds olds photo archive
Worlds largest Trade Shop
Worlds largest Auction
Site/Shop
Mobile/Data Content
Aggregation
Fraunhofer
Fokus
City University
London, UK
University
Carsten Jacob Advisor
Professor Neil
Maiden
mylab.fokus.fraunhofer.de/
I-SOFT OOD
Irena Pavlova - Advisor
www.isoft-technology.com
Seekda GmbH
Michal Zaremba
seekda.com
iSR.eu
Francesco Ruffino Advisor
Ict-sme.eu
Il Sole 24 ORE
S.p.A.
Andrea Gianotti
www.ilsole24ore.com/
Thales
Pascal Bisson
www.thalesgroup.com/
www.city.ac.uk
Institute for Open
Communication Systems
The UK's centre of
excellence for HumanComputer Interaction and
Services
SME Technology provider
with expertise in
interoperable frameworks
and services
Austrian based
International e-Commerce
technology and services
provider
ICT SME Research
Europe. Not profit ICT
SME Research Network
Italian leading economic
and financial newspaper
and news website.
Mission Critical Systems
2.3. Technical and strategic relevance (relevance for software-intensive systems)
2.3.1.
Technology 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 results7 of, and differentiates from, other (past or running) cooperative (e.g. IST,
ITEA8, ARTEMIS or national) 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 description 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 the 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. Nevertheless, 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..
The 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 13 of 85

The presentation of data plays a major role in Mashup development.
Mashups are a relatively new and lightweight kind of web application. Most well-known are consumer
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. As 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, textfiles, CSV data (Character/Comma separated 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 are not
mutually exclusive, combinations 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 frameworks 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
information 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 scripts 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 several 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 and 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 14 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 machinereadable information”
The drawback of the above have been largely identified in “2.1 – General goals” and includes their
aim at technologists and not users, restricted 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 30,000 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 services
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
Primary
IST/FP6
STASIS
ITEA2
DiY Smart
Experiences
ITEA 2
UsiXML
Situation
SMASH-ITea
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 P2P
federated repository in a B2B
business document context.
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.
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
Reuse/Innovation
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.
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 DiYSE, 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.
The models and declarative 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 extract
the parts that the user is interested in,
decoupling easily the functionality from the
Proposal Part B: page 15 of 85
Base Technologies
& IPR
OWL, RDF, SparQL,
WSDL
Full LGPL Open
source from project
STASIS Template
definitions
TONNY
UsiXML
specification
language and
related models.
To be defined what
SW components
might be relevant.
UsiXML intends to
IST/FP7
SOA4All
Spanish
National
Morfeo
EzWeb
Secondary
IST/FP7
FAST
IST/FP7
NEXOF-RA
IST/FP6
SEAMLESS
IST/FP7
HERA
IST/FP7
ROMULUS
multiple device, user,
culture/language, organisation,
context, modality and platform
applications.
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.
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.
Context aware visual Programming
Environment
interfaces. This potentially beneficial
relationship between the two projects will be
evaluated and possible explored during the
project.
SOA4All 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
developed tools.
deliver with Open
Source: Apache or
LGPL
Relationship to SMASH-ITea : SMASH-ITea
and Morfeo EzWeb are pursuing 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 developers will do it, or other
tools will provide it.
Morfeo EzWeb
Mashup platform as
target for SMASH-IT
gadgets and
mashups.
Re-use
Extraction of information to develop services
WSDL
WSMO, WSMO-Lite,
MicroWSMO
RDF
Ajax, GWT, ExtGWT
(for UI)
All the core platform
is available as Affero
GPL.
Holistic Service Architecture
promoted by ETP NESSI
SRRN - Federated P2P repository
Overall architectural services framework
Web Information Systems
Projection of information for user
Fast gadget
development tool for
non-programmers.
Available as GPL.
N/A General
Architecture
LGPL – OS P2P
Repository; RDF
RDF
MDA and RESTful APIs
Service interaction
API Definitions
Open template storage
Proposal Part B: page 16 of 85
2.3.2.
Innovation
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 systemengineering 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 the 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 tangible 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 – SMASHITea 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 whom 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 Internet 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 and “Middle-Aged laggards” 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 services.
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 stated 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 web7. 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 17 of 85
Recently, a lot of research has been invested into creating so called Mashup solutions that help
developers and 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. Although 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 prepared 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 forecast 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 combine 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 show 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:

Service 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 having 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 18 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 communities
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 on 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 interacting.
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. SMASHITEA will directly impact the way users use software 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-ITEA 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 SMASHITEA . 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 additional 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 media 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 because 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 19 of 85
particularly pertinent for mobile devices.

Semantics Impact
The SMASH-ITEA project is related to semantic 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, semistructured, 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 geolocalization, availability in the user’s calendar 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-ITEA will provide a significant innovation impact in the area of standards . This is
documented 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
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
To provide the business and
technical foundation for the project
Metric
 95% hit rate of 1st pass acceptance of
deliverables
 No full rejections
 No significant CA/Contract disputes
escalated to board
 WP9 validation and use cases conform
against original requirements – 80%
(change control)
 Degree of correctness of original vision
and any conflicts arising
 Coverage in the SOTA of the technologies
in practice (usefulness)
Work Package
WP1: Project
management and
Quality Assurance
To provide a technical architectural
and functional specification

WP3:
Architecture,
Specification,
Integration


To recognise and service-enabled
informal and formal services from
websites, applications and devices





Cohesion between M12 and M36
specifications
Applicability of functional design to
practical aspects
Acceptance and use of the autobuild
environment
Minimal human intervention during
recognition process
Minimal human intervention when using
recognised services in subsequent
processes
Ease of use: Used by non experts
Speed of recognition
Proven to work with 10 formal services &
5 informal ones of partners, 2
Proposal Part B: page 20 of 85
WP2: Vision,
Market,
Requirements &
SOTA
WP4: Service
Recognise &
Autobuild
Integration
To provide resources for the
following relatively disparate
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.

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
services input, processing and
output phases.

To reconstruct recognised services
into one service frontend and a
composite service definition using
drag and drop modality, advanced
HCI patterns, context and taking
advantage of already-stored
templates / service mashups.








To integrate the results from WP4-7
into one coherent suite, control the
process execution, and to provide
proper monitoring and
administration facilities.



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
To disseminate the project
outcomes intensively and
extensively addressing the proper
audience through different channels
and material and to ensure there is
a clear policy for IPR/Exploitation
post-project




applications, 2 devices and 10 non
partner services
Ability to store any information asset
generated 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
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 terms of experienced
subjective satisfaction (means: user trials,
feedback, surveys) as well as of the
privacy aspects – at least 75% score
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
expectation and quality of the result - 1:1
results between the SMASH-ITEA
process and as if the user has performed
all the above manually
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
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
General Dissemination
•
2 workshops help with around 50100 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
Proposal Part B: page 21 of 85
WP5: Mashup
Resources
WP6: Adaptation,
Context, and
Personalization
WP7: Service
Front End
Reconstruction
WP8:
Housekeeping &
Management
WP9: Use Cases,
Verification, Pilot
and
Demonstration
WP10: Impact,
Dissemination,
Discussion,
Exploitation
•
4 participations, at least, in
standardization efforts
•
25% growth in website traffic yearon-year
 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 engagements 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 following:
 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 (open source) technologies, methodologies and specifications (in fact all
SMASH-ITea technical deliverables are open) to the public environment to create maximum
impact. This includes where possible European Standards Workshop agreements related to
the technologies 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-aged laggards’,
‘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 exploitation
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 22 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 during the
second half of the project it is intended to publish different articles in international scientific and
trade magazines/journals. Most of the scientific dissemination activities will be faced by the
universities 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 parties 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 deployers 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, SMASHITEA will straight away interact with other projects and propose a more general event
structured like www.semanticweek.eu which can be composed of several project meetings,
symposia, high-level industry days, workshop technical days etc

Independent experts will be invited to participate during the presentations/panel and if truly
necessary some will be funded reasonable travel/accommodation. They will also contribute to
the project through face-face meetings with SMASH-ITEA project members themselves during
time around the workshops.

Obviously the first workshop will be geared more towards requirements and technology whilst
the second will focus more on the case studies and pilots since the validations and
demonstrators will be underway. An attendance of 50 representatives is envisioned dependent
on the scope of the workshop and acceptance with other projects. Targets will be (in order)
technology providers, associations/bodies, industrial users, consultants, and academics

Newsletter: SMASH-ITea will also edit a 6 monthly newsletter

EU Networks: The project plans to exploit the participation of the consortium or its single
members in EU networks and communities, including different clusters and/or initiatives such
NESSI, NEW, SFE Alliance, Cluster Events, Future Internet Forums and welcomes any clustering
initiative that may be specified by the EU.
Proposal Part B: page 23 of 85

Focus Groups. Since SMASH-ITea is highly user centric it will engage 3 focus groups
(Seniors, High School and ‘Middle Aged Laggards’) and possibly 4 if an international one is
formed. The idea of these groups is to interact with the project on a regular but informal basis
From a SMASH-ITea point of view the groups will:

Input into requirements

Utilise the cases/demonstrators

Be involved in discussions/dissemination
From a Focus Group point of view, and dependent on the group, the groups hopefully can get:

An insight into technologies of today

An insight into research and science

Interaction with other communities for their enlivenment
Standards Impact
Recent studies have confirmed that standards play an important role in the diffusion of new technology
and ultimately contribute to growth. On the basis of a survey conducted of 700 companies, the study
finds that in the one per cent of Germany’s gross domestic product and one third of its economic
growth were attributable to standards, Standards are at least as important as patents for growth. They
act as catalysts for the spread of innovations in the market.
This is just one of the reasons the SMASH-ITEA pays so much attention to standards and their
application. In WP10 there is a specific Standardisation & Liaison Tasks led by market leader TIE
and also involving Telefonica who have a wide range of standards engagements. It will address this
interaction culminating with an activity and recommendations report. Of particular interest is a real
commitment to standardisation and related activities by the partners in advance of the project both in
the context of this project and indeed their current standardisation engagements.
For example, leveraging and supporting the converged Telco, IT and Internet operations of the
Telefónica Group, TID is an active contributor in several international bodies. Its standardization
activities cover various technology fields and we can distinguish the participation in: W3C, ETSI,
3GPP, OMA, OMTP, OGF, DMTF et. In relationship to SMASH-ITEA , the most related body is W3C,
with its activities in Web Services, Semantic Web, Widgets, Context Modeling. Within the context of
SMASH-ITEA TID will also explore links and possibly contributions to the Open Ajax Alliance
(working on interoperable Ajax-Based Web technologies and covering Mashup requirements) and the
Open Mashup Alliance (working on interoperability interfaces for Enterprise Mashups).
Coordinating partner TIEs commitment to standards is quite extreme having been chair of the
European eBusiness Interoperability Forum (eBIF), European eBusiness Standards (EBES)
both of which is sponsored by the European Commission and Hosted by the Comitée Européen de
Normalisation (CEN). The formers aim is to address technical and non-technical interoperability
issues such as guidance, trust, semantics and possible legal issues whilst the latter is target at
technical aspects. It is obviously the intention of SMASH-ITEA to interface, where necessary, to such
forums to provide input and seek feedback. TIE is also keen to promote the possibility of a Service
Front Ends workshop in CEN perhaps producing a CEN workshop agreement (CWA) from SMASHITEA results.
2.5.2.
Exploitation
Indicate how the partners will exploit the project results after the project end. For software- or systemengineering related activities, describe, at least for companies that are not software tool vendors, the
(e.g. BU’s) management expectations and involvement.
This § should enable to answer, for each partner, to the following questions:
▪ Is there an adequate description of the exploitation perspectives and dissemination plans
(publications and standardisation)?
▪ Are the management expectations from, and involvement with, software- or system-engineering
related activities clearly described for the companies that are not software tool vendors?
▪ Are the future potential products or services identified?
Proposal Part B: page 24 of 85
2.5.2.1.
Exploitation Activities
The SMASH-ITEA exploitation activities are planned to ensure a communal and harmonious yet
impacting approach to the exploitation of the project results beyond the duration of the project. It will
reduce the actual partner exploitation time learning-curve of the participants wishing to exploit
SMASH-ITEA results. Such tasks should provide the foundation for the exploitation evaluation and
communication process. This includes the production of guidelines to outline timing, rights and
obligations for the exploitation process. It should provide partners with templates with which they can
express their results in commercially acceptable formats.
Throughout the project duration the background exploitation activities of the project consortium will
cover the assessment of the market, assessment of the related technological developments and the
business potential especially by the industrial partners. Such an operational model is essential for a
software development project on the cutting edge of the technology and acting in a fast changing
environment.
The standardisation results, analysis metrics, further use cases and business can all assist in the
identification of the exploitation potential of project results. Finally, access could be provided to
internationally recognized comparison benchmarking tools with which results should be compared.
An example of the partners commitment to exploitation is in the statements from TIEs CEO Jan
Sundelin who is particularly keen to maximize TIEs and others investment in SMASH-ITea s and as he
stated during project discussions: “TIEs business has moved from licenses to SaaS and the service
market will continue to explode in the coming 2-3 year IF we have stuff like SMASH-ITEA and we
need to get a part of it all. Development is necessary our [sic] the US will take this market also. The
interesting part is that players like G**gle don’t have such user tool and thus an oportuity [sic] to be
had. This is SMASHs, TIEs and your chance.”
General Plan
Below is an illustration of the expected main exploitation intention of the consortium partners as
SMASH-ITEA ideas, technical, market and the business environments stands now although of course
these will evolve over time and the projects duration/results. SMASH-ITEA will produce two
exploitation reports deliverable at M24 and M36 to formally state these expectations. However, for all
partners, especially non – academic ones, since they provide around 50% of self investment in the
project, will continually be looking at direct or side exploitation opportunities of the RTD of SMASHITEA. In a general sense this will be as follows:
Partner Type
Technology
Provider
Academic
User
Exploitation Plan
They will typically integrate the RTD ideas, concepts, specifications, interfaces
and components into their own products or make specific products based on
these. This enforces their innovative image and provides additional feature sets to
market to existing and new customers
A typical plan here will be to engage new ideas, researches and researchers in
similar or connected fields which will in turn provide value added to their students,
PhDs and the universities or research institutes as a whole
Using the technology as is if the prototype is suitable or more likely to invest in
further iterations of it from the technology providers but gaining advantage of the
SMASH-ITea IPR policy on cooperation after the project and knowledge within it
(quick-start)
Specific Partner Exploitation Plans
This section gives an illustration of the expected main exploitation intention of the consortium partners
as SMASH-ITEA ideas, technical, market and the business environments stands now. Of course these
will evolve over time.
Company
TIE
Technology
Provider
User
Exploitation Plan
TIE has already invested heavily in SaaS, services and usability through its TIE
Kinetix Development and Purchase of companies Digital Channel (content
syndication) and Mambo5 (eCommerce shop). Similarly TIE has invested in SOA
through contribution to the NESSI ETP (including projects NEXOF-RA, SOA4ALL
and NESSI2010) and in SOA4ALL managed the successful studio and B2C task
and in NEXOF-RA takes the SFE proof-of-concept role. TIE sees front end assets
Proposal Part B: page 25 of 85
University of
Twente
Academic
Philips
User
Technology
Provider
Telefonica
Technology
Provider
ATOS
Technology
Provider
Answare
Technology
Provider
as key and in particular wants to make our Kinetix Dashboard which integrates our
product for administrators (but based on component services) instead, as a
window to the whole world of services which can be managed and interconnected
by any user so opening up our services to the complete SaaS environment and us
to that environment. We believe SMASH-ITea is an opportunity to do this.
Thus it is TIEs intent that the RTD combination of SMASH-ITea concepts can be
integrated into our existing products which bring value-add to the market and TIE.
Specifically, TIE products that will be targeted are in the B2B, MDM and Content
Syndication domains all of which are applicable to SMASH-ITea.
University of Twente has several mechanisms to exploit knowledge at the
academia level. University of Twente will use the knowledge gathered in the
project to publish articles in relevant magazines, journals and conferences, thus
communicating research to meaningful communities of practice. Participation in
conferences, workshops, and seminars mainly in Europe but also in selected
international events of recognized excellence.
As a research and education partner the exploitation plan focuses on re-using the
research results and achievements in further research activities and in teaching
and training of future research generations
???
The area of Service Front-Ends is one of the key elements for our strategy
towards a new Internet that is more accessible, easier to use, adapts to the ever
changing needs of the users and provides the foundations for the creation of an
open ecosystem of telco and internet services. The commercial interest of such
research is two-fold: explore new market opportunities for converged
Telco/IT/Internet services on the WEB, and drive the transformation of the
company towards a completely online operation. SMASH-ITEA will generate
valuable concepts and results that complement and enhance our own Application
Mashup platforms, or provide a completely new strand of technology that will find
applications in the areas mentioned above. In terms of scientific results, we are
very keen in exploring the semantic concepts and technologies it will produce, in
order to explore synergies with our research projects and internal pilots with
Operating Businesses.
Atos Origin, as industrial and commercial partner, will validate and exploit the
technological results of SMASH-ITea within and beyond the duration of the project
in their respective areas of industrial and commercial influence, by transferring
SMASH-ITea tools and technologies to their local portfolio of customers in the
public and private sectors. Atos Origin also coordinates or participates in services
projects (SOA4ALL, COIN, INFRAWEBS, NEXOF …) and has experience for
exploitation of services and semantics research and development results from
European projects, which is to be seen as a valuable asset for SMASH-ITea .
Moreover, Atos Research & Innovation has a key role in the NESSI European
Technological Platform (http://www.nessi-europe.com) in the Working Groups of
Semantic Technologies and User Services Interactions and represents an
excellent opportunity for early exploitation of SMASH-ITEA results as they become
available within the project’s planning. In particular, NESSI is an excellent platform
for an industrial partner like Atos, to contact the key players in the industry to
formalise agreements for exploitation in a context where potential partners are
familiar with the idiosyncrasy of research and development projects results. Also,
Atos Origin leads or participates other Spanish technological platforms like INES,
es.Internet, eSec or eMov
As industrial and commercial partner, ANSWARE expects to participate in the
development of new services and applications around the SMASH-IT concept,
enhancing its know-how in web technologies and context-awareness. Answare will
exploit SMASH tools and technologies in its business lines, mainly eHealth,
entertainement, security and energy sectors. Answare expects to open new
business lines and generate income from SMASH-IT results.
Proposal Part B: page 26 of 85
UPM
Academic
BARCELO
User
Horizons
Software
Technology
Provider
Faculty of
computer and
information,
Cairo university
ANSWARE participates in services projects (e.g. NIMOV, a service for a mobile
user to monitor and control the health of babies from the Hospital) and has
experience for exploitation of R&D projects, which is a key asset for SMASH.
Being a partner of NESSI and a INES, Answare has access to the key players in
the industry of Software and Services to exploit research and development
projects results.
The Computer Networks and Web Technologies Lab (CoNWeT Lab,
http://conwet.fi.upm.es) at Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) focuses its
research in the area of Service-oriented Computing, Web-centric middleware and
Cloud Computing. Thus, the overall goals in SMASH-ITea correspond to the
research interests of the CoNWeT Lab. Its involvement in the project will allow
UPM to continue this research direction and will directly contribute to its ongoing
research, dissemination (i.e., academic and technical publications) and education
plans. As a research and education partner, UPM’s exploitation plan focuses on
re-using the research results and achievements in further research activities, and
in teaching and training of future generations of researchers. Incorporating the
research and development results of SMASH-ITea, together with CoNWeT’s
experience from other ongoing EU FP7 projects such as FAST or 4CaaST, into
our teaching activities in both postgraduate and PhD. programs enables us to
keep teaching in sync with the newest technology development and provide the
students with up-to-date knowledge and therefore enhance the education quality
of our University. In addition, both the knowledge gathered in the project and its
results and achievements will be published on major scientific conferences and
through journal papers. Not only will UPM contribute, but also it will lead these
publication efforts. Finally, as a member of the Board of the Morfeo Community
(http://www.morfeo-project.org/index.php?lang=en), UPM-CoNWeT is strongly
interested in integrating the results and experience obtained from the participation
in this project to existing open source initiatives within Morfeo Community for its
open source industrial exploitation. In particular, UPM-CoNWeT will transfer the
results and achievements of the project to Morfeo’s open source enterprise
mashup development environments and platforms by adapting and extending
them.
Barceló Viajes, within the Group Barceló, injects in SMASH-ITEA its extensive
knowledge and experience in the technologies and business view in the tourism
sector and online travel portals. Currently, Barceló has a specific R&D
department focused in new technologies and systems that can improve their
current systems. During and beyond the project, the commercial department of
Group Barceló will check and analyse the results as a starting point to transfer the
solution and technological services to the current systems used in Barceló. Most
of the results expected from SMASH-ITEA will allow Barceló to improve their
assessment and personalized treatment with the customers for each trip.
Horizons Software provides web-based SOA software products for Enterprise
Performance Management (EPM), Business Process Management (BPM) and
Project Management Office (PMO) Management, for both private and public
enterprises. Typical users of our products range from enterprise staff members to
end users who could be ordinary citizens, many of which are not technology
savvy. Moreover, there are many dependencies and common objects between the
areas of EPM, BPM and PMO that open great opportunities and new usages from
integrating these types of services. So we plan to transform our products to utilize
web 2.0 technologies in order to allow users to integrate services from two or
more of our products and possibly other web sites using easy to use, interactive
and device configurable interfaces. SMASH-ITEA with mashup research and
technology development will be utilized to combine strategy, process and project
enterprise services in new ways that will maximize integrated information, new
insight and enhanced intelligence delivery to a wide spectrum of users.
FCI intends to disseminate the know-how acquired in the project through
conferences, workshops and ranked journals. This will enable the SMASH
communicating research to meaningful communities of practice. Participation in
conferences, workshops, and seminars mainly in Europe but also in selected
Proposal Part B: page 27 of 85
(FCI)
Academic
Media
International
LLC.
Systems and
Computers
Department, AlAzhar University
Eteration
Technology
Providers
MANTIS
Turkey 3
international events of recognized excellence. As a research and education
partner the exploitation plan focuses on re-using the research results and
achievements in further research activities
Media International with its wide experiences in the digital media, content
management, Mobile VAS will use and apply the resulted framework/platform for
applications that can be used commercially. The company will define a complete
and tailored set of instruments, tools and mechanisms for the outcomes of the
SMASH-ITea project, its objectives and its results, in conjunction with an effective
strategy for the usage of these instruments. In view of the project’s overall
activities, objectives, goals and target groups, the following have been defined as
necessary components for the project’s strategy:
1. Use the outcomes of the project in enhancing the communication with all the
visitors of our high ranked portals and websites
2. Integrate our various websites together in an easy and professional way.
3. Integrate the resulted service(s) with other relevant standards bodies and
industry groups.
4. The promotion of the project and its results at seminars, conferences,
concentration meetings and other relevant events.
To achieve the above, Media International will use and get benefit from its Specific
R&D centre focusing on basic, collaborative, multi-disciplinary research in the field
of Digital Media, Online content & Social Media and its deep knowledge and
know-how in the fields of Research, portals and software development & Online
Marketing and our data bank with its huge content and accumulated users’ output
and behaviour. These tools will help turning the resulted platform into commercial
applications needed in the market. Our past experience in similar EU projects will
lead us to do this.
Al-Azhar University is one of the largest and oldest Universities in Egypt. The
Systems and Computers department is one of the well established departments at
the faculty of Engineering. The department has many of the specialists and has a
great contribution in many of the Computer Engineering fields especially in
Artificial Intelligence and Data Mining. The team will be responsible for developing
many of the AI algorithms required for the project. As a research University, we
will be able to conduct the survey on the state of the art SMASH SOTA
technologies including semantic web, web service ontologies, mashups, etc. In
addition, due to our experience in data mining, we will be able to develop efficient
techniques and strategies for the collected data from real world applications and
virtual (on-line) data sources. Our algorithms will be designed to relate and extract
many of the hidden data from the huge collected information. Moreover, as a
research organization, we are interested in helping in the information
dissemination phase and we already have experience in technical writing and
organizing conferences and workshops. In addition, our team will be glad to write
a book about the project experiences. Also, part of our effort will include
developing courses to be taught to undergraduate and graduate students. In
addition, we can participate in the technical documentation to the project.
???
???
???
Proposal Part B: page 28 of 85
3. Consortium overview
(2 pages maximum)
If your project has software- or system-engineering related activities, highlight the participation of the
software tool vendors or, otherwise, justify why the participation of a tool vendor would have no added
value for the project. Sketch how you will manage the consortium (e.g., PCC, core members,
clustering, subcontractors ...). In case of large companies state which unit or division is participating.
This § should enable to answer to the following questions:
▪ Is there an adequate project management plan?
▪ Is the consortium balanced w.r.t. partner types (i.e. large industries, SMEs and universities/research
institutes)?
▪ Is the consortium balanced w.r.t. countries (and in accordance with the EUREKA rules, i.e. minimum
two different partners from two different countries)?
▪ (For projects having software- or system-engineering related activities) Are software tool vendors
participating; if not, is it justified?
Overview
#
Participant organisation name
Nature
Short
name
Cou
ntry
RTD
TIE
NL
1
TIE Nederland B.V.
International Dutch based B2B
Services Company
2 ???
Twente [by line]
ACADE
MIC
TWENTE
NL
3
Philips Consumer Lifestyle, the
Advanced Technology group.
INDUST
RY
USER
PHILIPS
NL
4
Telefónica Investigación y
Desarrollo
Spain’s leading research labs in the
telco and IT sector.
RTD
TID
ES
ATOS ORIGIN Sociedad Anónima
Española
Spanish based leading international
IT services provider
Answare
Solution Providing SME
RTD
ATOS
ES
RTD
ANSWARE
ES
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
Oldest and largest Spanish technical
university
ACADE
MIC
UPM
ES
Viajes Barceló S.L.
Spanish Travel Company
USER
BARCELO
ES
RTD
HORIZONS
EG
9
Horizons Software
Software Products and Services
10.
FCI + byline
ACADE
MIC
MEDIA
EG
5
User
6
7
8
Proposal Part B: page 29 of 85
11,
Media International LLC
Content related ICT
12
Eteration
13
MANTIS
14
Turkey 3
RTD
MEDIA
EG
SMASH-ITEea Involvement
SME
User
Technology Provider
Yes
High education/univ
Research Organization
Public Body
Non profit
0%
20%
40%
60%
Figure 1: SMASH-ITea Splits by Number
Types of Particpation by Cost
User
6%
Large
37%
SME
AC
AC
27%
SME
30%
Large
User
Country balance:
Proposal Part B: page 30 of 85
80%
100%
No
Figure 2: Location of Partners
Country Split by Number of Partners
Egypt 21%
Netherlands
22%
Region Country
Country
#
Cost (K)
%
EU
Netherlands
Germany
Spain
France
Bulgaria
Portugal
Austria
Hungary
Italy
United Kingdom
Europe Wide
1
1
3
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1074
578
1638
720
208
361
282
299
220
377
207
8%
8%
23%
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
8%
NL
DE
ES
FR
BG
PT
AT
HU
IT
UK
EU / UK
Total
Turkey 21%
Spain 36%
Proposal Part B: page 31 of 85
13
5963.1
100%
% Cost By Country (in K EURO)
Germany, 578
Netherlands,
1,074
Spain, 1,638
Europe Wide,
207
United
Kingdom, 377
France, 720
Italy, 220
Bulgaria, 208
Austria, 282
Hungary, 299
Portugal, 361
Figure 3: Country Splits By Number of Partners and Funding
Project Management
ITEA2
Partner
Organisations
NCPs
Executive Board (lead ATOS)
Coordinator
(TIE)
Partner
Leads
Partner
Leads
Partner
Leads
Partner
Leads
Operational Board (lead TIE)
Project
Management
(TIE – Campbell)
WP1-2
Task Members
WP leads: WP3-10
Research (R) (Science)
Management
(Twente – Dr Vd Broek)
User
Management
(Barcelo - Blanes)
Research Forum : WP3-8
User Forum: WP9
Technical & Development
(T&D) Management
(TIE – Dr Abels)
Impact & Exploitation
Management
(Philips - Tuinenbreijer )
Tech/Dev Forum : WP4-8
Impact Forum : WP10
Task Leads
WP Leads
Advisory Board
Focus Groups
3.1.1. Roles
The structures within the project have responsibilities as defined in the following table.
Item
ITEA2
NCPs
Partner
Organisations
Description
This represents the Officials in ITEA2. All liaisons with ITEA2 from the project shall be
through the coordinating party except in specifically mandated or agreed
circumstances.
This represents the Officials in individual NCP. All liaisons with NCP from the project
shall be through the coordinating party and/or the leads of each country. The country
leads being: TIE (NL), Telefonica (ES), Horizons (EG), Eteration (TK) except in
specifically mandated or agreed circumstances.
These represent the management of each individual contractor within the project.
Individual partner leads from each contractor feedback to their management as
necessary and the Coordinating partners shall also feedback to them as applicable.
Proposal Part B: page 32 of 85
Item
Partner Leads
Partner Board
Coordinator
Operational
Board (OB)
Project
Management
Research
(Science)
Management
Technical and
Development
Management
User
Management
Impact and
Dissemination
Management
Description
Each project partner (there are no subcontractors or third parties) allocates a single
contact person for the project (Partner Lead). The Partner Lead will have to have the
authority to both represent and commit their organization in the project’s decisionmaking process or for conflict resolution.
The Partners Board (PB) is the forum in which all partners are represented. Its purpose
is to deal with organisational and contractual matters rather than project activities which
are performed via the project manager assisted by the EXEC. It is chaired by a
representative from ATOS, rather than the Coordinator. This ensures that there is not
over dominance of the Coordinating partner in both coordinator and project
management roles and also balances the decision taking and representation powers. It
is the purpose of the BOP to represent all partners’ interest at a management level and
in extreme instances handle conflicts or appeals which cannot be handled by the
Project Manager, Operational Board, WP Leads and Task Leads. The Board shall
meet at least every 6 months. Specifically it: Takes strategic decisions, Ensures that
the project maintains technical and cost objectives, and resolves technical and
administrative issues that are not resolved by other means within the project.
This represents TIE as the official Project Coordinator. As well as fulfilling its
obligations in the technical work and applicable contracts it acts upon instructions from
the Board of Partners and ensures that the Consortium Agreement is adhered to. The
Coordinator shall also provide the Project Manager.
The Operational Board is a light-weight mechanism to assist the operational
coordination of the project in a flexible yet structure way and is composed of 5 senior
responsibles for key activities areas; namely: Project Management, Research,
Technology & Development, Users and Impact & Exploitation as described below. It
shall be chaired by the Project Manager who shall report as OB lead and PM to the
PB/Coordinator. It shall meet on an adhoc, as-needed basis and its responsibilities
are: Takes tactical decisions, resolves project-wide issues and assist the project
manager in areas where communal decision making would be more appropriate or
beneficial, suggest project modifications, ensures that the project maintains technical
and cost objectives, and resolves technical and administrative issues
Perhaps the key individual role in the management structure is the Project Manager
who ensures the operational and tactical management of the project as well as being
the coordinating and focal point of many of the management structures. Since their
activity is in upholding most of the processes mentioned in this section the details of
this role is pervasively described. Within SMASH-ITea the Project Manager shall be Mr
Stuart Campbell Chief Technology Officer of Coordinating Partner TIE
The Research Management (RM) Role shall be held by Dr. Egon L. van den Broek
from the University of Twente (NL) and is responsible for the project’s overall scientific
and research vision and coordination
The Technical and Development Manager (TM) shall be Dr Sven Abels of TIE. Sven is
an experienced and accomplished Development Coordinator of software company TIE
and previously led Technical and Development integration tasks in other projects such
as STASIS.
The User Manager (UM) shall be Kees Tuinenbreijer, Manager of user partner Philips.
Kees is of course a leading promoter within Philips and whose interest span many
sectors and continents
The Impact and Dissemination manager (IM) shall be Nuria Sanchez of ATOS. Nuria is
an experienced and accomplished technical ‘Marketeer’ and has been involved in
similar positions in many other projects and initiatives. Nuria shall:
Proposal Part B: page 33 of 85
Item
WP Leads
Description
Each WP is lead by a single partner (WP leader) that assumes responsibilities for the
work undertaken and reports to the Coordinator. They also will liaise with other WP
leaders towards aligning and harmonising the work in the respective workpackages and
the overall SMASH-ITea goals. Proposed WP leads are:
WP
1
2
3
4
5
Task Leads
Advisory Board
Focus Groups
Person
Stuart Campbell, CTO TIE
SMASH-ITea Project Manager
Dr. Egon L. van den Broek
SMASH-ITea Research Manager
Nikolaos Tsouroulas, Head of Unit,
Telefonica
Dr Sven Abels, EU Manager, TIE
SMASH-ITea Technical Manager
XXX, Horizons
WP
6
Person
XXX, Eteration
7
Nikolaos Tsouroulas, Head of Unit,
Telefonica
Germán Herrero Cárcel, Senior
Developer/Manger, ATOS
Kees Tuinenbreijer Manager, Philips
SMASH-ITea User Manager
Nuria de Lama Sanchez, Head of
Unit ,Atos
SMASH-ITea Impact Manager
8
9
10
The diversity of activities undertaken in workpackages mandates the delegation of
coordination responsibility to team or task leaders. Task leaders (and vice leads) report
directly to the WP leader
The advisory board reports to the Impact Representative in the OB to help guide the
project through external views and input. This is defined elsewhere in this section.
The focus groups are formalised external groups which will provide a wider view of
external requirements and usage. The groups include, provisionally: High School,
Middle Age – Low Internet use and Seniors. This is defined elsewhere in this section.
3.1.2. Control Mechanisms
Project overall control will be exercised through the following instruments:
Item
Risk
Management
Quality
Management
Change
Management
Conflict
Resolution
Description
All the bodies, partners and leads need to be involved in risk management and the
Project Manager shall be the conduit for this although direct paths are also available to
the OB and PB. Risk related activities will also be assed with the brief actions being
Risk Identification, Risk Quantification, Risk Response Planning, Risk Monitoring and
Control
An overall quality plan will be developed at the beginning of the project via WP1 task
T1.2. Quality plans describe the acceptance criteria for the deliverables of each
workpackage, how conformance to these criteria will be measured, when quality
checks will be performed and by whom.
Scope changes can occur for many reasons: changes in requirements and
specifications (due to internal or external reasons), deviations from plans, changes in
Partners issues, risks etc.
Attempts will be made to resolve conflicts as close as possible to the source of conflict.
Workpackage leaders and the Coordinator will employ a problem solving approach in
order to achieve consensus, ensuring a win-win outcome for conflicting parties. If
conflicts cannot be resolved at that level, the PB will be asked to intervene.
Proposal Part B: page 34 of 85
4. Description of work and work organisation
Give at first a global overview of the technical work and of the work plan devised to perform it, if
possible using diagrams. Then, present each work package, using the tables below. Detail the major
milestones12 and deliverables for the whole project. This § should enable to answer to the following
questions:
▪ Is there an adequate work plan?
▪ Is the role and contribution of each partner clearly defined?
SMASH-ITea contains the workpackages as summarised below. During the course of the PO
preparation there were observations by some NCPs and the ITEA2 office that the number of WPs was
high and this should be condense with the rationale being the challenges of finding leaders, interfaces
created etc. However, whilst acknowledging these risks the consortium decided that such a
condensing was largely artificial (6 or ½ a dozen?) and wanted to maintain very clear focused work
packages and tasks so as to assign very clear objectives, roles, and responsibilities and by doing so
this would in fact create tighter interfaces etc. Whilst there is some risk of drop-out due to the ITEA2
country process the consortium also considered by making focussed tasks this would also allow
partners who might assume leadership to more clearly identify with the specific activities.
WP2
WP1
WP3
WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7 WP8
S
M
A
S
H
WP9
WP10
WP2
WP3
WP1
WP1: Project Management & Quality Assurance
 1.1 Guarantee the accomplishment of the objectives
 1.2 Define quality assurance, risk/conflict
 1.3 Day-Day Operational Management
 1.4 Control that deliverables are on time and within the budget
 1.5 Control finances
 1.6 Quality Assurance
 1.7 Coordinate information flow within the consortium
 1.8 Resolve conflicts/take actions
WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7 WP8
S
M
A
S
H
WP9
WP10
WP2: Vision, Market, Requirements, and SOTA
 2.1 Confirm and synchronize the project vision
 2.2 Describe the target audience and the target market sector
 2.3 Define the general use case scenarios implement (To set the
cross-project requirements
 2.4 Set the cross-project requirements
 2.5 Position SMASH-ITea in the current IT landscape (SOTA)
WP2
WP3
WP1
WP3: Architecture, Specification, Integration
 3.1 Establish technical principles and guidelines
 3.2 Allow for a common architecture / components
 3.3 Guiding the software development process
WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7 WP8
S
M
A
S
H
WP9
WP10
WP2
WP1
WP3
WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7 WP8
S
M
A
S
H
WP9
WP10
WP4: Service Recognise & Autobuild
 4.1 Generically recognise services from websites
 4.2 Autobuild, and thus service enable informal services
 4.3 Make gadgets from the wrapped services
 4.4 Interact with services from devices/applications
 4.5 Provide an evolvable service description
 4.6 Store recognized and autobuilt services as a service memory
 4.7 Interact with end users in service construction
Proposal Part B: page 35 of 85
WP2
WP3
WP1
WP5: Mashup Resources
 5.1 Reutilise and upgrade existing federated repository systems
 5.2 Provide service templates for a range of devices and popular
applications
 5.3 Memorize recognized and autobuild services for reuse
 5.4 Provide runtime semantic recognition
WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7 WP8
S
M
A
S
H
WP9
WP10
WP6: Adaptation, Context and Personalisation
 6.1 Capture context and profile information
WP3
 6.2 Describe the captured information in a uniform way
WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7 WP8
 6.3 Develop adaptation algorithms for services
S
M
A
S
H
 6.4 Develop sophisticated recommendation mechanisms
WP9
 6.5 Develop interfaces for the different engines
WP10
 6.6 Enable mechanisms that protects the user privacy
 6.7 Provide interfaces to adapt recommendations
WP7: Service Front End Reconstruction
WP2
 7.1 Provide a system for merging services into one frontend
WP3
 7.2 Adapt the Service Frontend if a new service is included
WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7
S
M
A
S
 7.3 Define and consider multiple input modalities
 7.4 Include and combine other user input during mash-up
WP9
 7.5 Provide a description format for SMASH-ITea ed services
WP10
 7.6 Provide a feedback mechanism for the recommendation engine
WP1
WP1
WP2
WP2
WP1
WP3
WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7 WP8
S
M
A
S
H
WP9
WP10
WP8
H
WP8: Housekeeping and Management
 8.1 Specify and control the SMASH-ITea process execution
 8.2 Provide support for long running services
 8.3 Take care of the technical adaptability and compatibility
 8.4 Integrate the output from the RTD work packages into one
coherent suite
WP2
WP2
WP1
WP3
WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7 WP8
S
M
A
S
H
WP9
WP10
WP3
WP1
WP9: Use Cases, Verification, Pilot and Demonstration
 9.1 Guarantee that the project hits the needs of the market
 9.2 Define a list of scenarios
 9.3 Prototype a semantic content syndication solution
 9.4 Integrate prototype into an existing web shop application
WP4 WP5 WP6 WP7 WP8
S
M
A
S
H
WP9
WP10
WP10: Impact, Dissemination, Discussion, Exploitation
 10.1 Create and disseminate the project marketing material
 10.2 Present the project outcomes in relevant conferences
 10.3 Present the project achievements in standardization fora
 10.4 Cooperate with other related projects
 10.5 Transfer results to the different communities
 10.6 Provide a post project IPR plan and exploitation strategy
In addition, each RTD workpackage follows exactly the same pattern in terms of the development
orientated deliverables including the sixth-monthly timing at month 6,12..36 etc to ensure maximum
iteration and impact of the activity. The initial Mock-ups (M6) will largely be slideware creations to
ensure the users and development communities can all discuss and shape in a comprehendible way.
Then follows the M12, M18, M24 interaction where each RTD workpackage handles a timeline
appropriate for it and its interconnection with other deliverables. However, for the final M30 version
Proposal Part B: page 36 of 85
which will be utilised by the Use Case and Pilot WP. A typical WP implementation plan will thus look
like the following:
T4-8.3.1
M6
T4-8.3.2
M12
T4-8.3.3
M18
T4-8.3.4
M24
T4-8.3.5
M30
T4-8.3.6
M36
Description
Prototype I: Mock-Up
Creation of a visual story board considering all
research and technology aspects as well of tasks of
this workpackage and other workpackage
developments which can be shared between users,
academic researchers and technologists
Prototype II: Developed
First pass development to try to turn the story board
into something real to help demonstrate the idea of this
WP and trying to introduce some easy wins of the
development. Basic functionality only of prime features
with “bells and whistles” removed. Would link with
other prototypes but in a very artificial way through
screenware, sandboxes etc. Research and
Technology parts still ongoing at this stage. This will
probably be too early for users except an initial view –
certainly they wouldn’t be able to play with it but may
be able to visualise some elements to provide valuable
feedback
Prototype III: Refined
The core functionality should start to emerge more
solidly including the fact the research part is complete
and technology part largely complete. Thus core
functionality should evolve more and be built on and
supporting functionality developed in the first pass.
Links with other WPs, probably not all but key linking
ones, should be stronger. Users will get a stronger
impression, still probably not be able to use it but will
be able to start to provide more than superficial
comments. Similarly external demonstrators will be
more shareable and meaningful
Prototype IV: Established
All parts of the development should be in situ and the
destiny clear (including risks) with decisions to be
made on go/no-go of certain elements. For secondary
parts these should also be clear and all ‘bells and
whistles’ be in place. Links should have been made to
all WPs. Technology phases complete at this stage.
Users should be able to play with the integrate
prototype and even begin some aspects of validation
Prototype V: Matured
All the software components should be in place and be
integrated together. Users will be expected to use the
prototype and provide the validation reports. Between
M30 and M36 developers will be addressing bugs and
addressing major barrier items from users to ensure
use cases and demonstrators can be conducted.
Prototype VI: Released
Final integrated prototype based on the final evaluation
results. This will be made available to all and also will
be synchronised with final versions of the Functional
and Technical specifications
Proposal Part B: page 37 of 85







Verification
Mock-Up
Baseline established
Methodologies and
techniques identified
Use case scenarios
including data sets defined
and resulting requirements
in terms of functionality and
scalability
Software
Conceptual framework
defined
Architecture defined
Implementation plan
specified
Component mock-ups final
and first prototypes
implemented
Software
 Refined conceptualizations
and architecture
 First integrated use case
demonstrators – some parts
only
 First evaluation results
Software
 Refined conceptualizations
and architecture
 First integrated use case
demonstrators – some parts
only
 First internal evaluation
results
Software
 Integrated SMASH-ITea
infrastructure is realized
and deployed
 Start of formal evaluation
results of individual
components available
System
 Use case demonstrators
are installed and deployed
 Goal-driven performance
and usability evaluations
 SMASH-ITea solution is
delivered
Proposal Part B: page 38 of 85
4.1. Work plan
For each of the Work Packages:
▪ clearly state the technological starting point and the expected results;
▪ clearly indicate the role of the partners having a major contribution to the work.
Roles
Whilst some roles are identified below; the annexes containing partner descriptions and also the
accompanying ITEA financial XLS also provides further information.
Work Plan
Month
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
WP1
T1.1
T1.1.1
T1.1.2
T1.1.3
T1.2
T1.3
T1.4
T1.5
Project Management and Quality Assurance
CEC Reporting and Reviewing
Formal CEC Reports and Reviews
Formal CEC Reports and Reviews
Formal CEC Reports and Reviews
Management Plan, Quality Procedures, Metric definition
Oversight, Adherence and Monitoring
CEC Liaison and Executive management
Project Management and Office
WP2
1 2 3 4 5
Vision, Market, Requirements and SOTA
T2.1
T2.2
T2.3
Project Vision Consensus
Target Market Sector Descriptor
Requirement Analysis
T2.3.1
T2.3.2
T2.3.3
T2.3.4
T2.3.5
T2.3.6
T2.3.7
T2.3.8
T2.4
T2.4.1
T2.4.2
T2.5
Recognition & Autobuild
Resources
Adaptation & Context
SFE Reconstruction
Housekeeping & Management
Legal, Trust, Security
HCI
Business Model
State of the Art Update and Positioning
Initial SOTA Wiki (Project Initialisation)
SOTA Wiki Update (Quarterly)
Plenary and Review Attendance
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
Month
4.1.1.
6
7
8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
Work Package 1
Work Package 1: Project Management and Quality Assurance
Description:
Objective
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.
Sub-Objectives
Sub Objectives include the following:
1.1 To guarantee the accomplishment of the objectives and the objectives of ITEA2 by reference to the
contract and action line documents
1.2 To define the collaborative framework in terms of processes, tools and procedures for quality
assurance, risk management, conflict management and produce the appropriate deliverables
1.3 To handle the day-to-day management by ensuring conformance to project plan
1.4 To control that deliverables are on time and within the budget
1.5 To control finances according to the CEC/Consortium agreements and to ensure distribution of funds
received from the commission as specified in the contract/consortium agreement/commission’s
guidelines
1.6 To guarantee high-quality standards at all participants by period quality reviews
1.7 To coordinate information flow within the consortium & between the consortium and the commission
by ensuring daily monitoring of email etc and the production of reports
1.8 To take appropriate actions in case of problems and resolve any conflict according to the project
management procedures and to make contingency plans where necessary
Proposal Part B: page 39 of 85
Starting Point: ITEA Contract / Proposal/ Consortium Agreement
End Point: The results of this WP will essentially be a successful, well managed project delivering all
formal deliverables as well as intrinsic expectations.
T1.1.1
D1.1.1-3
Formal Reports and Reviews
M1.1.1-3

T1.2
Prepare 12 monthly finance and associated reports for authorisation by the BOP /
ITEA2.
 Report on any issues with potential irregularities or unjustifiable claims to the BOP
D1.2
M - None
Management Plan, Quality Procedures, Metric definition



T1.3
Definition of common procedures and practices for deliverable handling
Produce the financial guidelines and oversee partner adherence to these.
Define the project control procedures for quality management and assurance.
Monitoring of these processes and procedures is again the collective responsibility of
the EXEC/BOP
 Define quality metrics which will allow monitoring of the projects ongoing and eventual
success
 Prepare the Risk Quantification report and prepare the risk management and
contingency plans
None
M - None
Oversight, Adherence and Monitoring

T1.4
Ensuring the accomplishment of objectives and take appropriate action for conflict
resolution
 Monitor the projects direction against defined metrics
 Ensure that project controls set out by the EXEC and consortium agreement are
adhered to and report any deviations to EXEC/BOP
 Ensure the project management is conducted effectively (oversight for good
governance)
None
M - None
Project Management and Office



Targets
Partners
Coordinate the activities within the specific workpackage under the guidance of the
technical and the executive committee
Manage and report the resources allocated, progress achieved and potential issues that
could result in delays
Assist partners for access to information with regards to the technical work, the contract,
their administrative responsibilities
Date
14
Type
Report
ID
D1.1.1
26
Report
D1.1.2
36
Report
D1.1.3
3
Report
D1.2
What
Project Annual
Report- Year 1
Project Annual
Report- Year 2
Project Annual
Report- Year 3
Project Procedures
and Quality Plan
TIE (Coordinator)
WP leads
Country Leads
Proposal Part B: page 40 of 85
Dissemination
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential
Confidential
4.1.2.
Work Package 2
Work Package 2: Vision, Market, Requirements and SOTA
Description
This workpackage aims in confirming the overall vision of the project beyond the high-level nature of the
proposal itself. It then identifies the exact positioning of SMASH-ITea in the market including setting the
precise use case scenarios. Requirements derived from the Vision, Use cases, the partners own
knowledge and experiences, and the wider SOTA will be documented and will be considered in all SMASHITea workpackages, especially when shaping their own vision. This workpackage will therefore help to
ensure that SMASH-ITea meets the innovation and research vision of the partners and the requirements of
the market to ensure it will have impact. Requirements will describe what actually needs to be created in
SMASH-ITea while the vision puts project into a context.
This workpackage kicks off the project and it begins with a confirmation of the scientific, technical, user and
economic vision of the project in terms of a high-level expression and synchronisation of ideas.
Objective
To provide the business and technical foundation for the project
Sub Objectives
Considering those points, the main objectives of this WP are:
2.1 To confirm and synchronize the project vision
2.2 To describe the target audience and the target market sector
2.3 To define the general use case scenarios implement (detail in WP9)
2.4 To set the cross-project requirements
2.5 To position SMASH-ITea in the current IT landscape (SOTA)
Starting Point: Proposal / Consortium Knowledge and Experience / External Market & Technology
End Point: The results of this WP will essentially be a business and technical foundation in which the
architecture, specifications and developments can conform to, take advantage of and be built.
WP2
Description
D#
M#
T2.1
Project Vision Consensus
D2.1.1
T2.2
This task will shape and scope the project and ensure a firm documented basis for the
overall vision, mission and scope of the project beyond the original proposal. It will capture
the views of the project stakeholders and identify any technical risk areas and differences
which must be resolved during the course of the project
D2.1.2
Target Market Sector Descriptor
T2.3
The project aims to deliver technology to the SFE market and this task will more granularly
document this market place including typical scenarios and other use cases. It will also be
used as inputs for validation in WP9
D2.2
Requirement Analysis
T2.4
This task aims in creating a requirement specification for the project and it is broken down
into a set of concrete subtasks, itemised below, that focus on the different components and
on additional common Legal, Trust, IPR and Security; HCI and Business issues: These
task are populated by the responsible partners from the RTD Workpackages WP4-8 and/or
specifically skilled partners such as City for the HCI components
D2.3
M2.3
State of the Art Update and Positioning
To ensure that the project is both grounded, respects and fully utilizes
technology which is available a continual technology watch activity will
take place during the first two years of the project as documented in task
T231 (Initialization) and T232 (Update)
ID
What
Month
Proposal Part B: page 41 of 85
Nature
Dissemination
D2.1
Project Vision Consensus Document
3
Report
Public
D2.1
Target Market Sector Descriptor and Use Cases
3
Report
Public
D2.3
Requirements Analysis Report
7
Report
Public
Proposal Part B: page 42 of 85
4.1.3.
Work Package 3
Work Package 3: Architecture, Specification, Integration
Description
This work package aims at providing a common architecture, component description, as well as a software
development environment as a basis for the other RTD work packages in SMASH-ITea . In detail, technical
principles and guidelines are to be described, which are then used to define a high level architecture.
Based on this, required components as well as interaction principles are defined. These activities should be
flanked by ensuring a coherent software build development environment in the project.
The work carried out in WP3 should serve as a technical basis preparing and initially guiding the work of all
other RTD work packages, by ensuring both a coherent software architecture as well as a proper basis for
the actual development. Where feasible WP3 will feed from and to the NEXOF-RA specification i.e. where
it can reutilise and add its system of patterns and pointers to concrete components and standards
UML will be used as a common grounding and systematic tools used to ensure common vocabulary and
sharing solutions for the patterns order to increase productivity of a consortium. In terms of the code based
then an auto-build and auto-test environment will be created (HUDSON, SVN, SONAR) which will foster the
quality of a code base which is especially vital for the future re-use, maintainability and extendibility.
Objective
To provide a technical architectural and functional specification
Sub Objectives
The basic sub objectives are:
3.1 To establish technical principles and guidelines that are valid throughout the project
3.2 To allow for a common basis in terms of an architecture and components, to be used by all partners in
the respective RTD work packages
3.3
To guide the software development process to ensure a fast progress, avoid time-consuming
misconceptions, late integration pitfalls, and an up-to-date environment
WP3
Architecture, Specification, Integration
T3.1
Architecture, Specification, Integration
M3.1
This task will specify the basic architecture of SMASH-ITea starting with a definition of fundamental
design principles, defining the high level model, and taking care of a proper component interaction.
It should incorporate results and recommendations from WP2 and establishes the basis for the
other tasks in WP3 as well as RTD work packages.
D3.1.1
T3.1.1 Fundamental principles and guidelines
T3.1.2
High level Architectural Definition and Model
D3.1.2
T3.1.3
System ecology: Component Definition and Interaction
D3.1.3
T3.2
Functional Specification
This task bases on the architecture and components defined by T3.1 and specifies the detailed
functions that are necessary for SMASH-ITea to work. This specification should be independent
from the final platform and serves as an input for the other RTD work packages.
D3.2.1
T3.2.1 Functional Specification Initial
T3.2.2
Functional and Technical Specification Final
D3.2.2
T3.3
Software Build environment
D3.3
M3.3
This task is responsible for establishing the software build environment that should be used in
SMASH-ITea . It should ensure a coherent approach and also take care of a proper integration of
software during the project. By this, a usable outcome in terms of software can be guaranteed at
the end of the project. Given the number of partners and different development approaches, this
task is a crucial one and runs throughout the project.
T3.3.1 Software Build Environment Creation
T3.3.2 Integration Coordination
Proposal Part B: page 43 of 85
Deliverables
ID
What
Month
Nature
Dissemination
D3.1.1
Fundamental principles and guidelines Report
4
Report
Public
D3.1.2
Architectural definition and models Report
7
Report
Public
D3.1.3
9
Report
Public
D3.2.1
System ecology: Component Definition and
Interaction
Functional Specification (Interim)
12
Report
Public
D3.2.2
Functional & Technical Specification (Final)
36
Report
Public
D3.3
Software development environment Report
36
Report
Public
Proposal Part B: page 44 of 85
4.1.3.1. WP4: Service Recognise & Autobuild Integration
Description
The RTD that will be developed in this WP is two-fold:


Creating a service wrapper around a resource, typically a website selected by a user, and to
“service enable” it either by semi-automatically or automatically building service enabled
assets
Crawl the existing SMASH-ITea space (virtual and physical) in order to discover new or
changed resources that can be exposed as services, e.g. search for an iPhone or another
Bluetooth device or newly installed software in the user’s environment
Following this, SMASH-ITea will propose a service this based on its nature, user’s preferences and context
of use. The user will be given a full control over this customizable interface via a specific editor if
necessary. Recognition includes:



Existing formally structured services (i.e. services described via RDF, WSDL, WADL etc) which in
reality represents micro-micro-fractions of what could be exposed as services
Informal (not yet formally structured) services from any web applications/form/site – the reality today is
that practically 100% of (potential) SFEs fall into this category
Pseudo services from other popular related devices and applications such as:
Objective
To recognise and service-enabled informal and formal services from websites, applications and devices
Sub Objectives
Thus the concrete sub objectives can be broken down as follows:
4.1 To generically recognise informal (i.e. resources that potentially can be exposed as services) and
formal (ie already annotated services such as through RDF, WSDL/WADL) and services from websites
utilising the following:

Stored templates (WP5)

Service memory (WP5)
4.2 To auto-build, i.e. annotate and wrap, and thus service enable resources with the help of:

Semantic recognition (WP5)

Adaptation and context sensors as appropriate (WP6)
4.3 To “AutoGadget” – i.e. to make gadgets from the wrapped services for non-SMASH-ITea applications
4.4 To interact with services from:

Popular devices/applications – e.g. iPod/iTunes, MS Outlook

Explorative front end technologies (e.g. Surface Computing)
4.5 To provide an evolvable service description and connection format for the recognition engine
4.6 To be able to store recognised and autobuilt services in a “service memory”
4.7 To interact with end users in service construction
Related recognition sub-objectives to achieve the above are interoperation with other WPs:
4.8 To receive feedback from the Recommendation system (WP6)
Tasks
WP4
Service Recognise & Autobuild
Research
T4.1
Service Recognition & Autobuild Methodology
D4.1
M4-8.1
This will specify a Service Recognition (SRG) methodology, which can be implemented through technology
and software, to be able to recognise services (formal or informal) on the web today. The focus will be on
the resources without service descriptions since the near 100% of services have no formal definitions and
include auto building services where these do not currently exist. It will include the following subtasks:
T4.1.1
Recognition methodology
T4.1.2
Autobuild Methodology
T4.1.3
AutoGadget methodology
Proposal Part B: page 45 of 85
T4.1.4
Application & Device methodology
T4.1.5
End-user assistance to service construction Output
Technology
T4.2
D4.2
Service Recognition and Autobuild Technology
M4-8.2
This Composed task will contain the following subtasks
T4.2.1
Service Recognition and Autobuild Technical Specification
Technical specification of the components, interfaces, interaction, and exchanged data with regard service
recognition as defined in the research for this WP
T4.2.2
Service Recognition Template Descriptions format
This task will define the precise service wrapper template model which will be created during the
development activity and be utilised particularly by WP7. This wrapper will also be used for the WP5
templates of popular front end orientated sites such as those for social and business networking, price
comparison, travel etc
Development
T4.3
SMASH-ITea Service Recognition and Autobuild Engine
Prototype
A series of development tasks building up the SMASH-ITea recognition and autobuild features
Deliverables
NOTE: Only the RESEARCH & TECHNOLOGY deliverables differ in WP4-8 since the DEVELOPMENT
deliverables are holistic. Because since these deliverables are described in the tasks above and in
the section introducing the workpackages no further detailing of Development deliverables is made
below
ID
What
Month
Nature
Dissemination
D4.1
Service Recognition & Autobuild Methodology
12
Report
Public
D4.2
Service Recognition and Autobuild Technical
Specification
SRA: Prototype I-VI
15
Report
Public
6+
Other
Programme
D4-8.3.1-6
Proposal Part B: page 46 of 85
4.1.3.2. WP5: Mashup Resources
Description
This work package is composed of the following distinct sub parts:

Federated Storage: Provides a distributed storage mechanism which can be accessed by other
components, and enables to storage and retrieval of SMASH-ITea assets such as templates,
composed services, recommendations etc
 Service Templates: Whilst WP4 focuses around innovation for creating services from websites, WP5
will provide specific service templates for including services into common web applications such as
social networking sites e.g. Facebook, standalone applications such as MS Outlook or iTunes, or
device information (e.g. iPod)
 Service Memory: In many cases pseudo services maybe have already been recognised with the help of
other SMASH-ITea users both individually (i.e. WP4) and sequenced (i.e. WP7) and thus this can be
used to save conducting unnecessary recognitions and reconstructions
 Service Semantics: The biggest issue in wiring services together is the semantic interoperability
between their message formats and vocabularies. SMASH-ITea will take advantage of the STASIS
Semantic Interoperability projects to semantic service wiring.
Objective
To provide resources for the following relatively disparate 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.
Sub Objectives
The concrete sub objectives can be broken down as follows:
5.1 To reutilise existing federated repository systems and upgrade them to suit the SMASH-ITea
environment including the provision of suitable interfaces to the components of SMASH-ITea
5.2 To provide service templates for a range of devices and popular applications – this includes to allow
their easy creation and serving them to the recognition engine
5.3 To memorise recognised and autobuild services for reuse (benefit of the community) interacting with
the recognition engine as necessary
5.4 To provide runtime semantic recognition and wiring reutilising existing technology upgrading them
within a service context
Related resource sub-objectives to achieve the above are interoperation with other WPs:
5.5
To enable the Recommendation system (WP6)
Tasks
WP5
Mashup Resources
Research
T5.1
M4-8.1
Mashup Resources Technical Research
A series of research challenges dealing with the reuse/development of storage and semantic technologies
adapted to the SFE environment of SMASH-ITea and also the reuse of SMASH-ITea ed Services (Service
memory)
D5.1.1
T5.1.1
SRRN Technical Adaptation
Determining the changes necessary to upgrade the Federated storage repository (SRRN) to conform to the
needs of SMASH-ITea
D5.1.2
T5.1.2
Service Memory Methodology
Since on many occasions the same (popular) services will be used, templates for these will be stored on the
federated repository to save specific and general users being asked repeated clarification questions. This
task will research into what is precisely needed to do this and will result in a technical template definition
D5.1.3
T5.1.3
Semantic Interoperability Adaptation
Determining the changes necessary to upgrade the STASIS semantic interoperability output in to the run
time world of services
Technology
T5.2
M4-8.2
Mashup Resources Technology
A series of technical tasks dealing with the specification of common SMASH-ITea resources
T5.2.1
SRRN Technical Specification
Proposal Part B: page 47 of 85
D5.2.1
T5.2.2
Service Memory Specification
D5.2.2
T5.2.3
Semantic Interoperability Specification
D5.2.3
T5.2.4
Service Templates
D5.2.4
Development
T5.3
SMASH-ITea Service Resource Pack
A series of development tasks building up the SMASH-ITea resources over time.
Deliverables
ID
What
Month
Nature
Dissemination
D5.1.1
SRRN Technical Adaptation
12
Report
Public
D5.1.2
Service Memory Methodology
12
Report
Public
D5.1.3
Semantic Interoperability Adaptation
12
Report
Public
D5.2.1
SRRN Technical Specification
15
Report
Public
D5.2.2
Service Memory Specification
15
Report
Public
D5.2.3
Semantic Interoperability Specification
15
Report
Public
D5.2.4
Service Templates
15
Report
Public
D4-8.3.1-6
SRP: Prototype I-VI
6+
Other
Programme
Proposal Part B: page 48 of 85
4.1.3.3. WP6: Adaptation, Context, and Personalization
Description
As SMASH-ITea pursues a user-centric approach for mashing up services, user context and personal
information are be taken into account in the process, which directly benefits the SMASH-ITea approach in
different ways:
 Resulting SMASH-ITea ’ed services best-fit the user needs, experience, and expectations directly
supporting the user in his/her task
 Usage of SMASH-ITea becomes easier and flexible as suitable information can be automatically
provided, which also attracts more users since the requirements to use SMASH-ITea are reduced
 Alternative matching services can be proposed offering a greater variety of services and enabling new
user experience.
Hence, the purpose of this work package is to define models and methodologies that enable a contextaware and personalised adaptation of SMASH-ITea service front-ends. Here, context information may
cover many different types of data such as sensor data, input and output device capabilities, user profile
information, user history, and user interactions.
Objective
To enable a personalized and context dependent adaptation of “SMASH-ITea -ed” services as well as
recommendations for “SMASH-ITea -able” services to share successful service combinations. This
involves services input, processing and output phases.
Sub Objectives
The concrete sub objectives can be broken down as follows:
6.1 To capture context and profile information including user interaction or expertise levels from the user
environment ((mobile) system and application) as well as web environment (3rd party services)
6.2 To describe the captured information in a uniform way to enable its interpretation, sharing, and
provision (to the service frontend) using semantic models, which should be adaptable in terms of
complexity, i.e., represented concepts and properties
6.3 To develop adaptation algorithms for services based on the interpretation of captured information, e.g.,
user intents, to properly decide on what data to combine and what service to merge
6.4 To develop sophisticated recommendation mechanisms to proactively propose suitable services to
users based on their currently SMASH-ITea -ed services and context
6.5 To develop interfaces for the Service Recognition and Autobuild engine and the Service Frontend
Reconstruction Engine enabling access to the captured data, feedback, and to provide contextual
enablers (sensors) and related information in return
6.6 To enable mechanisms that protects the user privacy through a controlled access to the captured
information
6.7 To provide interfaces for end users to adapt recommendations to their situated use
Related resource sub-objectives to achieve the above and interoperation with other WPs:
6.8 To utilize and propose services from the federated store based on the context (WP5)
6.9 To allow recommended individual services and SMASH-ITea ed services to be stored on the federated
storage (WP5)
6.10 To enable Service-frontend reconstruction (WP7) to trigger adaptation and incorporate user feedback
Tasks
WP6
Adaptation, Context, and Personalization
Research
T6.1
SMASH-ITea Context and Adaptation Research
D6.1
M4-8.1
A series of semi-interconnected tasks related to context, privacy, and recommendations.
T6.1.1
Privacy-aware context data capturing and representation
T6.1.2
User intent and feedback interpretation
T6.1.3
Recommendation and adaptation methodologies and algorithms
T6.1.4
End-user programming of contextual customisations
Technology
T6.2
D6.2
Description
Collection of Technical tasks for C&A Technology
Proposal Part B: page 49 of 85
M4-8.2
T6.2.1
Adaptation& Context Technical Specification
Technical specification of all the interworking components with their respective purpose, interfaces, and
exchanged data with respect to the adaptation and context process and as defined in the research for this
WP.
T6.2.2
Context data representation definition
An evolvable context description definition matching the defined data model to ensure that context
information, in a privacy-aware manner can be captured and represented.
T6.3
SMASH-ITea Context and Adaptation Services
A series of development tasks building up the SMASH-ITea context and adaptation related services over
time.
Deliverables
ID
What
Month
Nature
Dissemination
D6.1
Context & Adaptation Research
12
Report
Public
D6.2
Context & Adaptation Technical
Specification
SCA: Prototype I-VI
15
Report
Public
6
Other
Programme
D4-8.3.1-6
Proposal Part B: page 50 of 85
4.1.3.4. WP7: Service Front End Reconstruction
Objectives
The purpose of this workpackage is to take the services recognized by WP4 or that from narrative selection
and with the help of WP5/6 to SMASH-ITea them up into a reconstructed integrated Service Front End
which has:
 One common graphical service frontend
 One interconnected service definition/annotation
In doing this it is important to properly combine services and data (e.g. user input or context information) in
a manner that reflects the user intention as recognized by both WP5 and WP6 and explored to see if any
memorized or recommended services and adapted according to the context.
Objective
To reconstruct recognised services into one service frontend and a composite service definition using drag
and drop modality, advanced HCI patterns, context and taking advantage of already-stored templates /
service mashups.
Sub Objectives
The concrete sub objectives can be broken down as follows:
7.1 To provide a system capable of merging services into one Service Frontend (ie ‘SMASH-ITea ed
services) which has:
 One common service frontend
 One composite service definition
7.2 To adapt and reconstruct the Service Frontend if a new service should be included or if the context
changes
7.3 To define and consider multiple input modalities for initializing and controlling the mash up process
such as narrative or voice input (“I want to fly to a hot place”) and explorative (e.g. Surface Computing)
7.4 To include and combine other user input and context data, i.e., content data, during the mash up
process whenever necessary
7.5 To provide a description format for SMASH-ITea ed services representing combined services and
content data
7.6 To provide a feedback mechanism for the recommendation engine (WP6) and repository to capture
frequently used service mash-ups based on the context
Related resource sub-objectives to achieve the above and interoperation with other WPs:
7.7 To managed the stored service memory (WP5)
7.8 To allow semantic wiring (WP5)
Tasks
D#
M#
WP7
Service Front End Reconstruction
Research
T7.1
SMASH-ITea SFE Reconstruction Research
D7.1
M4-8.1
This contains two related key research areas of SMASH-ITea which are the methodology of SMASH-ITea
ing up services at a visual and service wiring levels. This is supported by a methodology related to service
recommendation and reuse.
T7.1.1
Service and content data mash up
T7.1.2
Mash up reconstruction Methodology
T7.1.3
User feedback options and recommendations
Technology
T7.2
SMASH-ITea SFE Reconstruction Technology
D7.2
Technical specification and models for the SFE reconstruction element.
T7.2.1
SMASH-ITea SFE Technical Specification
T7.2.2
SMASH-ITea SFE Service and content data mash-up Model
Development
T7.3
SMASH-ITea Service Reconstruction Engine
A series of development tasks building up the SMASH-ITea SFE Reconstruction functionality.
Proposal Part B: page 51 of 85
M4-8.2
Deliverables
ID
What
Month
Nature
Dissemination
D7.1
SMASH-ITea SFE Reconstruction Research
12
Report
Public
D7.2
SMASH-ITea SFE Reconstruction Technical
Specification
SRE: Prototype I-VI
15
Report
Public
6+
Other
Programme
D4-8.3.x
Proposal Part B: page 52 of 85
4.1.3.5. WP8: Housekeeping & Management
Description
This work package will take care of the house keeping, management and other process activities related
to the runtime element of the SMASH-ITea ed-up services. It will be tightly couple to the activity of the
other relevant RTD work packages to ensure a coherent and comprehensive SMASH-ITea system
according to the architecture and processes specified in other WPs and one that both serves the user and
the original SMASH-ITea recognised input to ensure any mashup generated by SMASH-ITea can be
executed as a process. Since much technology in this area already exists much of this activity will be
about adapting the cutting-edge research results in to the requirements of this project rather than any
reinventing of RTD already undertake.
Objective
To integrate the results from WP4-7 into one coherent suite, control the process execution, and to provide
proper monitoring and administration facilities.
Sub Objectives
The concrete sub objectives can be broken down as follows:
8.1 To specify and control the SMASH-ITea process/orchestration execution for SMASH-ITea ed
services
8.2 To provide support for long running services, anomaly monitoring and administration
8.3 To take care of the technical adaptability and compatibility of the SMASH-ITea approach in terms of
changing soft-/hardware and requirements (e.g. available update or patch mechanism, different
versions, plug-ins)
8.4 To properly integrate the output from the RTD work packages into one coherent suite that can then
be used for demonstration and evaluation
Related resource sub-objectives to achieve the above and interoperation with other WPs:
None
Tasks
WP8
Housekeeping & Management
Research
T8.1
M4-8.1
House Keeping and Management Research
A series of dispersed research orientated tasks dealing with the complexities on executing connected
services within a SMASH-ITea environment and this update of this environment to end users.
D8.1.1
T8.1.1
Integration and process execution
T8.1.2
Administration and monitoring
D8.1.2
T8.1.3
System customization
D8.1.3
Technology
T8.2
M4-8.2
Housekeeping and Monitoring Technical Specification
Specifications defining the technical specifications for the core part of this Workpackage
T8.2.1
Housekeeping and Monitoring Execution Specification
D8.2.1
T8.2.2
Housekeeping and Monitoring Administration Specification
D8.2.2
Development
T8.3
SMASH-ITea Service Management Processor
The development tasks necessary to creation the SMASH-ITea Service Management functionality
Deliverables
ID
What
Month
Nature
Dissemination
D8.1.1
Integration and process execution
12
Other
Public
D8.1.2
Administration and monitoring
12
Other
Public
D8.1.3
System customization
12
Other
Public
Proposal Part B: page 53 of 85
D8.2.1
D8.2.2
D4-8.3.1-6
Housekeeping and Monitoring Execution
Specification
Housekeeping and Monitoring Managing
Specification
Prototypes
Proposal Part B: page 54 of 85
15
Other
Public
15
Other
Public
6+
Other
Programme
4.1.3.6. WP9: Use Cases, Verification, Pilot and Demonstration
Objectives
Within this workpackage, industrial validation of the SMASH-ITea idea is performed. This will allow the
project team to demonstrate and evaluate the practical usability of the research results in a real-world
environment.
As such the WP will start with the early definition of the use cases to help fine tune both the market
aspects and requirements of WP2. In addition, a formal verification task is also need to ensure that the
software is conformant to the original requirements and functionalities expected or adaptations made to
adjust for missing aspects.
Next is validation cannot be done successfully in isolation from a real economy sector represented via
content providers, distributors and consumers. It means SMASH-ITea prototypes will be tested in a
context of real application in close cooperation with industry players especially SOLE24, BARCELO,
THALES also ISR and the focus groups. During a piloting process all the evidences should be collected
which provide a high degree of assurance that SMASH-ITea will consistently produce results meeting its
predetermined specification and quality characteristics. In order to do this, integrated pilots will be
implemented coming from the Future Internet domains coming from those listed below. For full details
see section 0:




Internet of Services:
Internet of Content:
Internet of Things:
Internet of Users:
BARCELO use case
SOLE24 use case
THALES use case
ISR use case
Travel Domain
Publishing Domain
Device Domain
Defined by ISR members
Objectives
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
Sub Objectives
To enable Service Front End reconstruction (WP7) to trigger adaptation and incorporate user feedback
9.1 To guarantee that the project hits the actual needs of the market
9.2 To define a list of scenarios by defining the business case, the stakeholders that are involved and
the information workflow
9.3 To prototype a semantic content syndication solution in the domain
9.4 To integrate prototype into an existing web shop application
Tasks
WP9
Use Cases, Verification, Pilot and Demonstration
T9.1
Use cases definition, plan, methodology and metrics
D9.1
In order to achieve the main objective this workpackage defines scenarios that are suitable for covering all
SMASH-ITea functionalities and to check that all requirements that have been identified within
workpackage 2 are fulfilled. Those scenarios will consist of business cases, stakeholders involved in the
scenario and information workflow specification for each of the 4 scenarios
D9.2
T9.2
Prototype Functionality Verification
Verification is ensuring "you built the product right” vs validation which is ensuring "you built the right
product". This task will thus produce a verification report but moreover interactive feedback to the last
stages of the development cycles an analysis against the original requirements and functionality expected
T9.3
Barcelo Pilot: Internet of Services
This case, in fact all cases, are composited of construction and Operation phases as stated hereunder.
This cases is about the BARCELO Internet of Services pilot
D9.3.1
T9.3.1
Internet of Services: Use Case Construction
This task will select, coordinate and perform all prototyping activities based on the prototypes and results
generated within WP4-8 It will use the SMASH-ITea approach to create the SMASH-ITea ed services
expected.
NB: Due to the nature of this task there is no associated deliverable – results will be via D9.7
T9.3.2
Internet of Services: Use Case Operation
The focus will be on the completeness of the prototype in terms of business work flow, i.e. prototype must
Proposal Part B: page 55 of 85
demonstrate all steps covered by business use case scenario and the system must be easy and efficient
to use. Like verification, the validation of SMASH-ITea properties will be made on permanent/continuous
basis. Feasibility of their verification/validation will be assessed. If the assessment is negative, it will be
reported why and let for subsequent work.
T9.4
SOLE24 Pilot: Internet of Content
As for T9.3 except for the SOLE24 Internet of Content Pilot
T9.5
Thales Pilot: Internet of Things
As for T9.3 except for the THALES Internet of Things Pilot
T9.6
D9.6
Focus Group Pilot: Internet of Users
As for T9.3 except for the ISR Internet of Users Pilot
T9.7
D9.7
Use Case Validation and Evaluation
M9.7
This task will collect the results of T9.3, T9.4, T9.5, T9.6 and evaluate them in a synthetic way as formal
feedback to the developers. However, it must be stressed that the report itself is not the real heart of this
task since it comes at the end. What is needed, and what will happen, is an agile and flexible interaction
between the development performs and the users
T9.8
M9.8
Demonstration
The purposes of the demonstration series of subtasks is to show the SMASH-ITea prototypes to the wider
world and elicit their feedback.
D9.8.1
T9.8.1
Plan for Establishment of Demonstration Environment
This will make a plan for the establishment of the demonstration environments which is suitable for
external ‘marketing’ demonstrations which will be geared to sectors, network contacts and technology
stakeholders. It will not involve software manipulation simple configuration and marketing wrap.
T9.8.2
Creation of Realistic Use Cased based Demonstrator
This will take one or several of the use-case environments of Task D9.3-6 and create a realistic use case
which can be show to users and technology providers alike. It will be accompanied by video/presentation
material to help with the demonstration and also be used at events such as the final workshop.
NB: Due to the nature of this task there is no associated deliverable.
D9.8.3
T9.8.3
Demonstrator Conduction
This task covers the performance of the actual demonstrations. This will include at SMASH-ITea events
such as workshops but will mainly be focused on the association and networking contact of all partners.
Deliverables
ID
What
Month Nature Dissemination
D9.1
Use cases definition, plan, methodology and metrics
Report
SMASH-ITea Verification Report
18
Report
Public
36
Report
Public
30
Other
Public
30
Other
Public
D9.5.1
Barcelo Pilot: Internet of Services Use Case
construction
SOLE24 Pilot: Internet of Content Use Case
construction
Thales Pilot: Internet of Things
30
Other
Public
D9.6
Focus Group Pilot: Internet of Users Engagement
33
Other
Public
D9.7
Use Case Validation and Evaluation Report
36
Report
Public
D9.8.1
Plan for Establishment of Demonstration Environment
27
Report
Public
D9.8.3
Demonstrator Summary Report
36
Other
Public
D9.2
D9.3.1
D9.4.1
Proposal Part B: page 56 of 85
4.1.3.7. WP10: Impact, Dissemination, Discussion, Exploitation
Description
This workpackage will ensure the project has impact to create and continuously increase awareness among
the potential users and other interested parties both within and beyond the duration of the project. Thus,
the main aim of this workpackage is the dissemination and technology transfer activities necessary and is
intended to create the maximum knowledge transfer about SMASH-ITea and results by broadcasting them
to the wider-world and seeking their feedback.
Of course, scientific dissemination through conference papers and journal articles will be promoted by the
academic partners via the Scientific Manager and SMASH-ITea has already proposed to the IBIS Journal
(Business Systems Interoperability Journal) features regarding the SFE topic and it already been receptive
to this approach.
In terms of other engagements necessary SMASH-ITea will of course cooperate with EU Cluster events
and other projects in this fields and also relevant ETPs such as NESSI, NEM and eMobility and where
SMASH-ITea partners are highly active as advised elsewhere in this proposal.
Another very important feature of this WP will be managing the interactions with the 3 focus groups (HighSchool, Middle-Aged laggards, Seniors and possibly a forth International) and also the advisory board as
itemised in section 2.
In order to reinforce the awareness of the project, concrete dissemination material will be also produced to
be used in events, conferences, mailings, workshops, and so on with one of the more regular materials
being a 6 monthly project electronic newsletter.
The exploitation element is another key consideration to ensure that the investment by the EU/Partners is
not wasted. This will include turning the IPR strategy suggested in this proposal document in to a solidified
and signed existence.
Concretely the sub-objectives can be categorised as follows:
Objective
To disseminate the project outcomes intensively and extensively addressing the proper audience through
different channels and material and to ensure there is a clear policy for IPR/Exploitation post-project
Sub Objectives
10.1 To create and disseminate the project Website; Newsletters; Press Releases and Marketing Material
10.2 To present the project outcomes in relevant conferences and to a wide audience including scientific
dissemination (papers) and industrial dissemination (workshops)
10.3 To present the project achievements in standardization forums
10.4 To cooperate with other projects related to same topics as SMASH-ITea
10.5 To transfer results to the industrial, research and standardisation communities
10.6 To provide a post project IPR plan and exploitation strategy
Tasks
WP10
Impact, Dissemination, Discussion, Exploitation
T10.1
Generic Promotion and Promotional Materials

Press releases launched and sent for publication in different media and different partners publicity
mechanisms.
 Creation and distribution of promotional leaflets, brochures, banners and other material.
Design of templates for the project presentations to be used in the different projects activities
NB: Due to the nature of this task there is no associated deliverable
T10.3
Dissemination
The consortium intends to survey the existing conferences and tradeshows in order to select those that will
be beneficial to SMASH-ITea as well as conducting predefined workshops and scientific dissemination.
D10.3.1
T10.3.1
Scientific Dissemination
Preparation of academic papers for its publication and/or promotion via conferences. Generally by the
scientific partners but also via research orientated industry partners. Target is 8 papers.
Proposal Part B: page 57 of 85
T10.3.4
SMASH-ITea Newsletter
SMASH-ITea will produce and circulate a 6 monthly newsletter of 2-4 graphical and user friendly pages
used to entice both scientific, project and commercial parties to take advantage of and contribute to
SMASH-ITea .
T10.4
Engagement
T10.4.1
D10.4.1
Standardisation Engagement
Liaison and engagement with formal and pseudo standards bodies and fora such as European Standards
(CEN) to evaluate forming a CEN Workshop Agreement (CWA) from the project results, also OASIS, W3C
and the Service Front End Alliance
D10.4.2
T10.4.2
EU, ET, Interproject Concertation &, Clustering
Participate in the ICT events, cluster meetings etc. for inter-project cooperation and creation of synergies.
Also to set up liaisons with different projects and initiatives linked to the SMASH-ITea theme. To engage
in related ETPs such as NESSI and possibly NEM
D10.4.3
T10.4.3
Engagement of focus groups
To manage the engagement with the 3 focus groups as described elsewhere in this proposal.
T10.5
Exploitation
The exploitation of development results will be the major task of the project consortium. This task will be
dedicated for defining different players interested in SMASH-ITea . The building of SMASH-ITea must
count on the cooperation and validation of major players in industry otherwise the results will not be widely
adopted by any of them.
D10.5.1
T10.5.1
IPR Plan
At proposal stage the consortium have already proposed an IPR strategy which will be further enhanced in
the Consortium Agreement. The IPR plan will be delivered by month 12 to ensure that as development
activity steps up there is a solid and understandable basis for all partners.
D10.5.2
T10.5.2
Exploitation Plan: phase 1
Collecting the rough partner exploitation information and for producing material for deciding priorities and
determining actions in the next year to prepare for exploitation beyond the project.
D10.5.3
T10.5.3
Exploitation Plan: phase 2
Making priorities and action list and marketing activities list based on Phase 1results.
 To make a Target list for segments and the related users by prioritise segments and users from Key
figures and potential impact
 Setting Exploitation objectives where each objective shall be Specific, Measurable, Achievable,
Realistic and Time-bound.
 Based on the Target list, to make a plan to define the Exploitation and marketing tactics
 Marketing Activities list / calendar
 Action list
 Cooperation Agreement
D10.5.4
M10.5.4
T10.5.4
Roadmap
The roadmap activities will look at SMASH-ITea and SFEs holistically to see what actions in this field the
wider community should do to achieve technical success, European impact and European benefits. This
will obviously take the technical and other lessons learned as well as feedback from workshops and focus
groups to populate this activity.
Deliverables
ID
What
Month
Nature
Dissemination
D10.3.1
Report on Scientific Dissemination activities
36
Report
Public
D10.3.4.x
Bi Annual Version of Newsletter
6+
Other
Public
D10.4.1
Standardisation Engagement
36
Other
Public
D10.4.2
D10.4.3
D10.5.1
D10.5.2
EU, ET, Interproject Concertation &, Clustering
Focus Group Report
IPR Plan
Exploitation Plan: Phase 1
36
36
12
24
Other
Other
Report
Report
Public
Public
Confidential
Confidential
Proposal Part B: page 58 of 85
D10.5.3
D10.5.4
Exploitation Plan: Phase 2
Roadmap
Proposal Part B: page 59 of 85
36
36
Report
Report
Confidential
Public
5. Major Milestones / deliverables
For projects having software- or system-engineering related activities, it is compulsory to provide, at
the end of the project, a Public Deliverable consisting in an update/extension of the software- or
system engineering related state-of the art provided in the FPP.
Quarter
Year
Milestone or Deliverable title8
Q[ ]
200?
[]
M#
Milestone
M
Progress
Type
Means of
M1.1.1
Project Continuation
after Year 1 Review
14
Go/No Go
To Payment
M-ADMIN
Approval of “Annual Report to CEC - First Year”
M1.1.2
Project Continuation
after Year 2 Review
26
Go/No Go
To Payment
M-ADMIN
Approval of “Annual Report to CEC - Second Year”
M1.1.3
Project Completion
36
Go/No Go
To Payment
M-END
Approval of “Annual Report to CEC - Third Year”
M#
Milestone
M
Progress
Type
Means of
NEW
Completion of Market
Opportunities (rebadged
Market Analysis)
Completion of Vision and
Requirements
7
Go/No Go
Project Success
MCRITICAL
Approval of Vision and Requirements
M2.3
M#
Milestone
M
Progress
Type
Means of
M3.1
Completion of
Architecture
9
Go/No Go
Project Success
MCRITICAL
Approval of Architecture
M3.3.1
Completion of all RTD
Preparation Activities
12
Go/No Go
To Task
MCRITICAL
Approval of all RTD Preparation Activities
M#
Milestone
M
Progress
Type
Means of
M4-8.1
Completion of all
Research
12
Go/No Go
To Task
MCRITICAL
Approval of Research Documents
M4-8.2
Completion of all
Technical Specifications
15
Go/No Go
To Task
MCRITICAL
Approval of Technical Specificaitons
M4-8.3.2
Completion of all
Prototypes Phase II
12
Go/No Go
To Task
MCRITICAL
Availability of all Prototypes Phase II
M4-8.3.3
Completion of all
Prototypes Phase III
18
Go/No Go
To Task
MCRITICAL
Availability of all Prototypes Phase III
M4-8.3.4
Completion of all
Prototypes Phase IV
24
Go/No Go
To Task
MCRITICAL
Availability of all Prototypes Phase IV
M4-8.3.5
Completion of all
Prototypes Phase V
30
Go/No Go
To Task
MCRITICAL
Availability of all Prototypes Phase V
M4-8.3.6
Completion of all
Prototypes Phase VI
36
Go/No Go
Project Success
MCRITICAL
Availability of all Prototypes Phase VI
M9.7
Completion of Use Case,
Validation and Field Test
Activity
NB Some other milestones were deleted
6. Rationale for funding
Describe shortly the rationale justifying your project’s need for funding. Discuss why the project is
needed, the added value of the European co-operation, the impact on European technological and
8
Titles should be self-explanatory.
Proposal Part B: page 60 of 85
commercial advancement (this is of the utmost importance for projects having software- or systemengineering related activities), ...
This § should enable to answer to the following question:
▪ Is there a convincing ‘Rationale for Funding’? (of the utmost importance for projects having
software- or system-engineering related activities)
The well-balanced consortium of 14 SMASH-ITea partners led by TIE is the European Union, Egypt
and Turkey. It consists of leading Large ICTs (Telefonica-TID, ATOS, Media), SMEs (TIE,
Horizons, Eteration, Mantis, TK3), Academic (Twente, FCI, UPM) and most importantly users (Philips
and Barcelo). Several of the parties have joint roles and the division between both the party types and
represented countries are roughly equal.. This creates a wider European focus which is necessary
since the need is not country nor domain specific and impacts each and every party which might have
the need to use or make services.
This consortium is committed to innovation and exploitation in the field of SMASH-ITea for massive
updates by users, enable SMEs and other potential service providers and to impact the Future
Internet. To ensure maximum impact and engagement, use cases in the Future Internet domains of
Internet of Content, Services, Things and People are also supported and through the ISR engagement
of the SME constituency, as well as focus groups relating to High School, Seniors and “Middle-Aged
laggards”.
SMASH-ITea will be founded on the availability of existing research project results with the objective to
take them as a basis, aggregate aspects together and form a concrete exploitation potential for each
partner, the consortium as a whole as well as standards impact (through a possible CEN Workshop
agreement – CWA) and wider European employment and leadership benefits. SMASH-ITea is
generic applicable to all business domains (purchasing, finance etc), all sectors (travel, publishing…),
all geographies (Europe, Africa…), all service stakeholders (creators, technology providers…) and
citizens/SMEs/Users/Corporations alike.
Through the deployment of a consortium representing a wide range of European and international
backgrounds, users and industrial list SMASH-ITea will represent the whole application domain of
human interaction systems, as well as associated domains. It will do this from the business
perspective, the implementation, and field test as well as allowing for wider dissemination. It will also
allow the investment of many SMASH-ITea players, including the EU research programs, to release
their existing expenditure on research in these topics and turn them into commercially exploitable
opportunities involving pre-competitive R&D.
Such effort would not happen without public funding, which acts as a catalyst to bring partners
together of differing regions, countries, sizes and types. It is quite difficult and expensive to organize
cooperation cross-Europe involving that number of partners from Industries, SME’s, Research Centers
and Universities. No single partner could do it alone. SMASH-ITea is still a major undertaken since
although the basics are proven still to make a true paradigm basis will need further input and
validation from all the partner types and aim for a common goal which can benefit all.
SMASH-ITea will provide a highly innovative service frontend solution for using services much easier,
faster and without any technical requirement. SMASH-ITea will increase European competitiveness in
three main aspects: allow European citizens and European companies to shorten time and costs when
using services, with SMASH-ITea everyone will be able to use services without having to learn any
technical aspects, SMASH-ITea can use normal web application and turn them into usable services.
The resulting platform will make the usage, provisioning and composition of services much easier and
will allow European SMEs and individuals to be a step ahead in the world wide software and service
domain which will further strengthens the local Europe industry.
Proposal Part B: page 61 of 85
7.
Contacts with Public Authorities 9
For each country involved in the project, provide the name of:
▪ the main contact person within your consortium (‘Consortium national contact person’), ▪ the Public
Authorities contacted person16 (essential for the EUREKA countries that are not member of the ITEA 2
Public Authorities).
This § should enable to answer to the following question:
▪ Were the Public Authorities contacted and is the outcome likely to be positive? (the answer is
discussed with PAs during the PO evaluation)
The Netherlands
Partners10
(use short name)
TIE
PHILIPS
UNIVERSITY OF TWENTE
Consortium national
contact person
Stuart Campbell
TIE
Stuart.Campbell@TI
Eholding.com
+44 7970 429251
Public Authority
contacted person
Guus Derks
AgentSchapNL >
guus.derks@agentsc
hapnl.nl
+31-88-6025932
Brief statement on the At a 2 hour conference between TIE (TIE CTO and TIE EU Coordinator) and Agentschapnl
outcome of the contact the SMASH project was presented in detail both in terms of the project composition and the
project clear objectives. The project was well received and the expectation was it would fit
the NLs strategic PointOne program as well as others.
Egypt
Partners
(use short name)
Horizons
FCI
MediaIntl
Consortium national
contact person
Nihal Nounou
Horizons
nihaln@horizonssoft
ware.com
+20 1067 0940
Public Authority
contacted person
Sally Metwally
ITIDA
smetwally@itida.gov.
eg
+20 165506414
Brief statement on the In a 1.5 hour meeting between the three Egyptian partners, project overview was presented
outcome of the contact by national organization ITIDA, local project leader decided, required project input and
documents discussed and clarified. The partners discussed their contributions to the project
and their expected exploitation of its outcomes.
SPAIN - NIKOS
Partners
(use short name)
<Partner U>
<Partner V>
<Partner W>
etc.
Consortium national
contact person
<Name>
<Company>
<email address>
<tel. number>
Public Authority
contacted person
<Name>
<Organisation>
<email address>
<tel. number>
Brief statement on the
outcome of the contact
TURKEY
Partners
(use short name)
<Partner X>
<Partner Y>
<Partner Z>
etc.
9
For the ITEA 2 Public Authorities (ITAC), information on the contact persons is available on the ITEA 2 website:
http://www.itea2.org/national_funding. For the EUREKA countries (see : http://www.eurekanetwork.org) that are not
member of the ITAC, the contact persons are National Project Coordinators (NPCs); look for them on the following
website page: http://www.eurekanetwork.org/in-your-country using the “Select your country” button at the bottom of the
page).
10
Important remark: Partners NOT claiming funding should explicitly mention it here.
Proposal Part B: page 62 of 85
Consortium national
contact person
<Name>
<Company>
<email address>
<tel. number>
Public Authority
contacted person
<Name>
<Organisation>
<email address>
<tel. number>
Brief statement on the
outcome of the contact
Proposal Part B: page 63 of 85
8. Appendices
These appendices should enable to answer to the following questions:
▪ Is there sufficient R&D competence and competitiveness in the consortium?
▪ Is the added value of each partner-cooperation identified?
8.1. Consortium description
The appendix should give a short description of each partner: both the partners’ positioning in their
market and their expertise in software technology should be briefly presented.
8.1.1.
[Company #1 name]
Describe business, company characteristics (large industry, SME) and size, expertise in Software
Technology which proves Research capabilities ….
8.1.2.
TIE
Organisation
Short Name
Logo
TIE Nederlands B.V.
TIE
Type:
Nature:
Country:
Role
ID
Technology Provider
SME
Netherlands
Coordinator / RTD
Country Lead
1
Core Business:
TIE is an international B2B software company, established in 1987 and focused on Business Interoperability. TIE enables companies to do
business electronically and to lower costs by synchronizing their product information and business processes with their partners in the
Supply Chain. TIE plays a major role in global eBusiness standardization and has years of experience providing TIE customers with the
benefit of solid, future-proof products. TIE is a Public Company with thousands of customers across all major industry sectors. TIE has
offices in the USA, Netherlands, Belgium, France and Hungary and is represented in Europe, Latin America and Asia. TIE is focused on the
following domains: Content Syndication, B2B Integration, Data Synchronisation, Financial Reporting (XBRL) and Collaborative Planning
(VMI).
TIE serves the market for B2B eCommerce integration software with a clear focus on the inter-company processes (order, shipping,
payment, etc.) based on globally accepted standards. This market continues to grow to include business process management, and data
transformation. We have responded to increased market demand with new products, services, and partnerships. Since its foundation in
1987 TIE has been active in B2B eCommerce, not only in application development but also in the standardization process. When the
Internet started its expansion TIE understood that this would trigger many new applications, essentially aimed at doing business more
efficiently. This implied that eCommerce using the Internet is not revolutionary but evolutionary. eBusiness would be based on an existing
body of knowledge about doing business electronically – a body of knowledge to which TIE has contributed over the years.
Specific competences for the project:
TIE is a major leader in the effort to reach a global electronic business standards framework by which all companies can communicate
electronically. TIEs Kinetix platform provides a next generation eCommerce system allowing all partners of the supply chain to
communicate with each other seamlessly. Within this area, TIE can benefit from its long experience with the Digital Channel concept which
connects different business partners and helps them to exchange information.
TIE has broad experience in content syndication. One of TIEs flagship products is the TIE Kinetix Content Syndication Platform. It provides
traditional companies with the tools to manage their product information and distribute it online from one master data source (the “single
source of truth”). Manufacturers will now be able to assist their partners by updating any reseller's or distributor’s web site with the latest
content updates, marketing campaigns and product information. This enables resellers and distributors to attract, educate and deliver the
critical product information that end users demand. With this background, TIE is knows the precise demands of the content syndication
market and TIE knows about the problems and challenges in this domain. With its background in research projects and cutting edge
technologies, the TIE RTD team bridges the gap between research and commercial activities.
TIE has been/is active in several EU projects including SEEMseed, SEAMLESS, STASIS, NEXOF-RA, SOA4ALL and NESSI2010. It has
acted as workpackage and task leader and has project managed the very successful FP6/Call 5 STASIS project of value 4M Euros
involving 12 partners including 3 from China and for which has permanently received top reviews and deliverable approval at first pass. The
Project Manager for this is Stuart Campbell, TIE CTO. In addition TIE is Board Member, Steering Committee Vice Chair and SME lead of
the NESSI European Technology Platform on Software and Service who direction can be useful to SMASH-ITEA. NEXOF-RA is the core
project for NESSI (and TIE is a partner) which aims at providing a reference architecture for software and services which is expected to be
re-utilisable within SMASH-ITEA. TIE is also a member of the NEM (Networked and Electronic Media) European Technology Platform.
Role in project:
As project visionary and party with the key commercial interest and experience with large scale EU projects TIE is assigned to the
coordinator role of this project and specifically Stuart Campbell, TIE CTO. TIE has almost 20 years of experience in the area of as a
software technology provider and thus will contribute too many RTD roles including key WPs 4 and 7 as well as utilising background IP with
WP5. It will also provide a use case in the eBusiness domain. As project lead and also a marketing specialist TIE will also contribute
heavily to WP10. TIE will also provide Development Leadership through Dr. Sven Abels which includes build and integration activity.
Proposal Part B: page 64 of 85
8.1.3.
PHILIPS
Organisation
Short Name
Philips Consumer Lifestyle
PHILIPS
Type:
Nature:
Country:
Role
ID
Industry
Large-ICT
The Netherlands
RTD / User
3
Core Business:
Royal Philips Electronics of the Netherlands is a diversified Health and Well-being company, focused on improving people’s lives through
timely innovations. As a world leader in healthcare, lifestyle and lighting, Philips integrates technologies and design into people-centric
solutions, based on fundamental customer insights and the brand promise of “sense and simplicity”. Headquartered in the Netherlands,
Philips employs approximately 133,000 employees in more than 60 countries worldwide. With sales of EUR 27 billion in 2007, the company
is a market leader in cardiac care, acute care and home healthcare, energy efficient lighting solutions and new lighting applications, as well
as lifestyle products for personal well-being and pleasure with strong leadership positions in flat TV, male shaving and grooming, portable
entertainment and oral healthcare.
Philips Consumer Lifestyle (PCL): the Advanced Technology (AT) group of PLC is partner in this project.
PCL AT is the international Know-how Centre of PCL. The PCL AT drives and provides new concepts and features creating innovations that
have substantial positive business impact for PCL. PCL stays true to their mission of improving the quality of people lives through timely
introduction of meaningful innovations.
The Innovation Territories of PCL include:

Personal well-being and health management: low cost, low threshold technology in the home that enables a personal coaching
and training to development a healthy lifestyle.

Smart and computing environments: embedded technology that enables low cost and low threshold access to information sources
and that allows for a continue sense of being safe and of being able to communicate within the social context of loved ones and
families.

Easy access: interaction paradigms that fundamentally decrease complexity in the interaction for control and access of content
and information.

Green IT and energy saving: Embedded control technology that aims at minimizing the energy consumption of CE appliances
(sustainability).
Specific competences for the project:
The vision of Philips Consumer Lifestyle is a world in which consumers have the freedom to enjoy their favorite digital content or access
services or information where and when they want. In this project, PCL’s specific competence is related to innovation areas such as the shift
of broadcast content to the internet, and the emergence of a rich set of web based services and applications.
Furthermore, Philips Consumer Lifestyle has competences in dissemination and exploitation of new ideas as developed in the SMASH
project.
Role in project:
Philips will be involved in the definition of use-cases. Philips will be involved in demonstrate-, validate- and ‘proof-of-concept’-activities in
the context of a smart home environment. Furthermore, Philips have their main interest in related exploitation activities.
Proposal Part B: page 65 of 85
8.1.4.
TELEFONICA
Organisation
Short Name
Logo
Telefónica Investigación y Desarrollo
TID
Type:
Nature:
Country:
Role
ID
Research and Development
Research Lab / Large Telco
Spain
RTD
Country Lead
4
Core Business:
Telefónica I+D is the innovation company of the Telefónica Group. Founded in 1988, it contributes to the Group's competitiveness and
modernity through technological innovation. To achieve this aim, the company applies new ideas, concepts and practices in addition to
developing advanced products and services. It is the largest private R+D centre in Spain in terms of activity and resources and is the most
active company in Europe in terms of European research projects in the ICT sector (Information and Communication Technology).
It currently collaborates with leading technological companies and organizations in 42 different countries, and more than 150 universities
located in different parts of the world. It also participates in the most important international forums on technological know-how, thus creating
one of the largest innovation ecosystems in the ICT sector. Products such as the public phones in the booths currently used by Telefónica
(1990), the large fixed and mobile network management systems (1990), data switches (1991), Internet access services (1996), the prepaid
system for mobile phones (1999), applications for digital homes and connected cars (2000), interactive “a la carte” digital television
(Imagenio) (2004), new services for television and new business models on Internet (2006) etc. are just some of the projects the company
has worked on.
Over the last few years, Telefónica I+D has grown to become a global network of centres of technological excellence that stretches far
beyond the Spanish borders, extending its R+D activities through offices situated in Barcelona, Granada, Huesca, Madrid, Valladolid, São
Paulo (Brazil) and Mexico. At the same time, Telefónica I+D is working for all the companies in the Telefónica Group in the rest of Europe,
America and Asia. In addition to the numerous technical awards it has won since its founding, the company received the Príncipe Felipe
Award for Business Excellence in 2002.
Specific competences for the project:
Telefónica I+D participates in the project through its IT Systems Line. Among the various research activities carried out by this unit the
following areas are of particular interest to SMASH-ITEA:

Service Front Ends: Research and development on core web technologies and platforms that will support access to systems and
services in the future Internet of Services. As part of this strand of research, we are developing an application mashup platform that will
allow users to configure their own operating environment, selecting and assembling web resources available on the network (Internet or
Intranet). It also envisions the development of technologies that provide ubiquitous, context sensitive, multi-modal and automatically
adaptive User Interfaces.

Open Source: Provides horizontal support activities to projects of all the research areas in topics related with open source software
models, development and research methodologies, business models, community building etc . Activities in this area provide support to
the Morfeo Open Source Software Community, where TID is a founding member of the board.

Cloud Technologies: Research and development on technologies that range from Cloud infrastructures to Platforms, Systems and
Software as a Service (XaaS) both for internal use within Telefónica or by our customers.

Back-end Systems and Technologies for Enhanced Operation Processes: Encompasses research and development in systems
and technologies that contribute to the optimal management of the operations of Telefónica. Within this area, we are developing new
system architectures and management process based on principles of autonomic computing and event-driven architectures.
Role in project
As a large R&D centre, TID has some advances skills in architecture and will then be the leader of the WP3 (Architecture, Specification, and
Integration). They will be also lead the WP7 (Service Front End Reconstruction) which specifically ties in with their existing SFE expertise as
promoted by FAST and through NEXOF-RA and, as large industrial, be the leader in standardisation. They will also be one of the main
contributors of WP4 (Service Recognise & Autobuild) which in turn links to WP7.
Proposal Part B: page 66 of 85
8.1.5.
ATOS ORIGIN
Organisation
Short Name
Logo
ATOS ORIGIN SAE
ATOS
Type:
Nature:
Technology Provider
Large-ICT
Country:
Role
ID
Spain
RTD
5
Core Business:
Atos Origin s.a.e [ATOS] is the Spanish branch of a major international IT services company, Atos Origin plc. Atos Origin’s business is
turning client vision into results through the application of consulting, systems integration and managed operations. ATOS ORIGIN is a
founding member of the European Technology Platform NESSI (Networked European Software and Services Initiative) officially launched in
September 2005 as industry’s commitment to cooperate on research and innovation in the strategic software, Grids, eServices and security
sector for Europe. NESSI aims to define a strategic research agenda on software and services. At national level, Atos Origin is also member
of the NEM (Network Electronic Media) steering board and is participating in other technology platforms like eMOV for mobility, eSEC for
security, PROMETEO for embedded systems, INES for software and services and eVIA for independent living and accessibility.
Atos Research & Innovation (ARI), node of R&D at Atos Origin in Spain, is a point of reference in innovation for the whole Atos Origin group.
It focuses on projects combining research & development and the economic exploitation of investigation’s results. Within the Consulting and
Public Sector business unit, ARI concentrates on the realisation of international projects, combining the most up-to-date technological
developments with a high awareness of the human factors. ARI consists of the following research units organised into five complementary
areas: NATURE (GIS and Environmental Applications), SYSTEMS, SOCIETY (Biotechnologies & Healthcare, E-Learning, Social
Applications, International Cooperation), INFORMATION MANAGEMENT (Innovative Government and Security), SERVICES (Grid
Services, Service Oriented Middleware Infrastructure, Innovation and Open Source & Software Engineering).
Specific competences for the project:
The Semantics & Service Engineering Unit, within the Atos Research & Innovation (ARI) department, brings SMASH-ITEA its ample
experience in the coordination, participation, development, integration and exploitation activities of research projects along with a large list of
successful deployment of R&D results. The group technical expertise has been developed in European R&D projects such as SOA4ALL,
NeOn, SeCSE, COIN, TAO, LUISA and INFRAWEBS. ATOS will contribute to technical tasks such as the test bed deployment, semantic
layer, and the overall design architecture. From the exploitation point of view, ATOS Origin as a large-ICT company will be involved in
delivering the results of the R&D to its clients. SMASH-ITEA is within the Semantics, Software & Service Engineering Unit and eTourism
Unit, allowing provide to SMASH-ITEA the knowledge and experience in the technologies and business view in the tourism sector.
Role in project
Due to its experience and its presence in both research and industrial areas, ATOS will be one of the main contributors to WP2 (Vision,
Market, Requirements and SOTA), of WP3 (Architecture, Specification, Integration) and of WP7 (Service Front End Reconstruction). ATOS
will also leverage its industrial background in WP8 (Housekeeping and Management) and WP10 (Impact Dissemination), in which ones
ATOS will be the WP Leader. In particular Atos will be responsible of the SMASH newsletter and Exploitation parts (IPR, exploitation plans
and roadmap). ATOS has a close relationship through its eTourism unit with BARCELO and will also assist in their use case.
Proposal Part B: page 67 of 85
8.1.6.
Answare
Organisation
Short Name
ANSWARETech S.L.
ANSWARE
Logo
Type:
Nature:
Technology Provider
SME
Country:
Role
ID
Spain
RTD
6
Core Business:
Answare is a Spanish ICT-based SME operating in national and international markets. The portfolio includes the provision of ICT
consultancy services and development of turn-key and R&D projects in a large spectrum of technological sectors (information society
technologies, Telecommunications, Aeronautics, Space, Defence, eHealth, Energy) and for a wide range of customers: EUMETSAT,
European Union Satellite Centre, SES ASTRA, Spanish Institute for Aerospace Technology, IBERIA, INDRA and contractor to EADS,
Alcatel, Telefónica, etc.
Answare has been involved in R&D projects at European level for FP6 IST-4 and EUREKA (ITEA, CELTIC and EUROSTARS clusters), at
national level (Ministry of Industry, Tourism and Commerce) and also at regional level (Innovation Plan from the Madrid Community).
Answare also provides active support in R&D issues to national institutions and associations such as the Centre for the Development of
Technology and Industry (CDTI) from the Ministry of Industry and the Chamber of Commerce of the Madrid Community.
Specific competences for the project:
Answare has various lines of R&D among which are web applications and services and R&D projects for the Mobile User based on the use
of open development platforms (e.g. MyMobileWeb, an open source, standards-based software framework that simplifies the rapid
development of mobile web applications and portals). Answare develops web applications and services in the eHealth sector, the
Entertainment sector and the Security sector (emergency situations such as disaster management).
Regarding the specific competences in Software & Services relevant to SMASH-ITEA, Answare is member of the Steering Committee of the
Networked European Software and Services Initiative (NESSI) Technological Platform and is also member of the Management Board of
INES, the equivalent Technological Platform in Spain for Software and Services.
Answare’s staff have participated in the full life cycle implementation of small and large ICT-based projects participating in all the phases
from requirements definition, design and architecture, development, integration and testing, delivery and maintenance.
In the ITEA2 DoitYourSElf project (DiYSE), Answare is leader of the Definition of Smart Spaces Contextualization (context aware
issues). Answare also contribute to other tasks with particular focus on Smart Spaces Applicatio n Composition, Smart Spaces
Personalisation and Profiling Component and Service Platform.
From the exploitation point of view, Answare focuses on the delivery of the results of its R&D projects to its clients.
Role in project
Due to its involvement in both research and industrial areas, ANSWARE will contribute to WP2 (Vision, Market, Requirements and SOTA).
As an ICT-based company oriented to Software, Answare will also contribute to WP3 (Architecture, Specification, Integration). Answare will
also contribute to WP6 (Adaptation, Context, and Personalization) and WP7 (Service Front End Reconstruction). Finally Answare will also
participate in WP9 (Use Cases, Validation, Pilot and Demonstration) and more particularly in the Internet of Services use case (BARCELÓ)
and in WP10 (Impact, Dissemination, Discussion, Exploitation).
8.1.7.
BARCELO
Organisation
Short Name
Logo
VIAJES BARCELÓ S.L.
BARCELÓ
Type:
Nature:
Country:
Travel Agency
Large
Role
USER
ID
8
Spain
Core Business:
Barceló has a network of travel agencies of over 505 travel stores in 23 countries, serving over two million travellers per year. Barcelo is an
organization with a strong focus on customer where assessment, personalized treatment for each trip, and extensive experience has
allowed it to become one of the leading companies and a reference, both in Spain and overseas, particularly in Latin America. Barceló
Viajes includes brands Barceló Viajes, American Express Barceló Viajes, Barceló Club and Vacaciones Barceló.
Founded over 75 years ago, Barceló is a company excelling in tourist services, which deals with different travellers offering trips ranging
from the most common destinations to unique, different suggestions. Furthermore, the Group has a traveller service centre, the
www.barceloviajes.com, Barceló Business Travel (Corporate Travel), Barceló PYMES and Barceló Franquicias, with the purpose of better
segmenting its services and handling different customer profiles more efficiently. Barceló is a company with a youthful spirit which supports
innovation and offers the most up-to-date and cutting edge tendencies on the market.
Barceló Group currently has a staff of more than 25.000 persons. The hotel division of the group employs about 24.000 persons and the trip
division approximately 1.400. The financial results obtained by the Group Barceló at the conclusion of the exercise 2007 are the following:
Turnover: 1.675 million Euros clear(net) Sales: 1.205 million Euros Net profit: 142 million Euros own(proper) Funds: 813 millions
Specific competences for the project:
Viajes Barcelo, within the Group Barceló, injects in SMASH-ITEA its extensive knowledge and experience in the technologies and business
view in the tourism sector and online travel portals. Barceló is an excellent user-end because they are one of the most important companies
in the touristic sector. SMASH-ITEA give to Barceló the new trends in front-end and services and the new innovations which will provoke a
better position of Barceló in the damaged touristic market.
Proposal Part B: page 68 of 85
Role in project
As an end-user, Barceló will be involved in the WP2 as the leader of the Target Market Sector Descriptor task. Barceló will also provide a
use-case demonstrating the Internet of Services in the context of a smart travel agency and will be the leader of the task 9.8
(Demonstration). The use case is detailed elsewhere in this document
8.1.8.
Horizons
Organisation
Short Name
Horizons Software
Horizons
Logo
Type:
Nature:
Technology Provider
SME-ICT
Country:
Role
ID
Egypt
RTD
9
Core Business:
Horizons Software, CMMI level 3 certified, provides web-based software products for Enterprise Performance Management (EPM),
Business Process Management (BPM) and Project Management Office (PMO) Management, for both private and public enterprises in Egypt
and Gulf region. Horizons software products and services focus on innovative business-driven, knowledge-based, and architecture-focused
management support systems to all stakeholders of an enterprise. Horizons professional services include IT architecture, IT strategy, and
Service architecture modelling. Horizons top members have great experience in research as well as business oriented software
development and professional services. Horizons staff includes three PhDs in Computer Science from Columbia University, USA and Al
Azhar University, Egypt. Horizons Research and Development Unit includes three graduate students and supervises research projects with
other graduate students at Al Azhar University College of Computer Engineering and Arab Academy of Science and Technology College of
Computer Science.
Specific competences for the project:
Horizons Software R&D and Software Development units have extensive experience in knowledge management, and web-based
development using architecture-based and business-driven principles. Horizons can provide a real business model were business
processes and services can be modeled and mapped to web services that automate business services. Horizons with its expertise in
Enterprise Service and Technology Architecture modelling using meta-modelling-based advanced knowledge management tools can
contribute in modelling the requirements and architecture of proposed solutions for selected business cases. Horizons can contribute to
SMAH-ITEA project competencies and skills in the areas of software development and services for the business domains of Strategy and
Performance Management, Business Process Management and Project Management Office systems. Horizons with its research capabilities
can greatly contribute to SMASH-ITEA research, technology development, piloting and exploitation activities.
Role in Project
???
8.1.9.
Media International
Organisation
Short Name
Logo
Media International LLC.
Media Intl.
Type:
Nature:
Technology Provider
Large-ICT
Country:
Egypt
Role
ID
RTD
11
Core Business:
Media International is a pioneering Egyptian joint-stock company working in the field of information technology, outsourcing and managing
and developing all forms of digital content (digital media, Internet solutions development, e-training, conference broadcasting, mobile valueadded services, secondlifeTM, etc.). Over the course of five years Media International has succeeded in excelling over other companies with
longer years of experience .
To achieve this, the institution depends on an ambitious strategic plan aimed at strengthening its position in international markets after
having made significant progress in Arab markets, particularly in the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC). Through its major financial capacity,
its experienced professionals, and its strategy, and contrary to the path taken by many other companies, the institution was able to expand
its projects in the international market to face the potential negative impact of the global financial crisis .
The work team consists of 340 people, most of whom are experts and consultants in many disciplines and from varied cultures and races
divided among many departments which cooperate to provide our customers with the best services.
Media International is committed to the highest international quality standards and the adoption of highly efficient enterprise management
systems. It was among the first IT companies in Egypt to receive the ISO9001. It is also preparing to obtain the CMMI, the latest certificate
worldwide in the field of software and IT company efficiency.
Specific competences for the project:
Media International LLC. will be able to participate in SMASH project through different angles:
(1) Availability of our online content, social user activities, use cases & log files via our huge Arabic & English Data bank that can be used in
Data mining to study users’ behaviour and social Media activities:
1- The entity manages and operates several (20) web portals & social websites. Among them, Islamoline.net which received the ISO9001:
2000 international quality certificate in December 2004 to become the first site to receive this certificate in the Arab world. Though word
"Islam" is in its domain name, its focus is not only on religious issues. The portal has contained over 524,489 Arabic and English articles and
about 1.8 million pages both representing almost 220 million words that cover news, analysis and global events, as well as all the topics in
the fields of politics, science, health, culture, art and Islam plus numerous audio and radio files around the clock.
Proposal Part B: page 69 of 85
2- Media Intl has the strongest presence in the virtual world of SecondlifeTM among all the IT companies in the Arab world. Via our Several
social 3D projects and islands and the enormous activities, huge visitors and Avatars, we can offer different types cultural activities, and the
results of our virtual 3D conferences in this community.
3- Media Intl. also owns and operates Tawasol Training Centre (A specialized training centre, offering several social, psychological and
media training programs. The centre offers its programs through direct training as well as e-training. Data and past experience in these
social activities can fit with SMASH project and be of benefit to analysis needed for the project.
(2) Media Intl. has its own R&D centre that can help in managing, analyzing the data (as a community in general and as an individual data
(keeping in mind the privacy issues)). Also, our recognition of the effect and variations of cultures which is based on the interest of several
and variant worldwide cultures in our website. We will examine the relations among variables targeted with the output model(s).
(3) Marketing the SMART project:
1- The entity is served by a highly experienced E-Marketing team that can be used in several online activities that can help our R&D centre
in traces of visitors input, analyzing our websites' logs & user’s interactions soit turning them into Plain English reports.
2- Good experience in Marketing, E-Marketing (SEO ,SEM, SMO (Social Media Optimization)) which can fit with creating, structuring and
turning the idea into several business models and new services based on Market needs, marketing analysis and Case studies.
3- Market Data based on our past experiences in this market, prioritized features with justifications and information about the opportunities
and relative ranking and importance of the features that will be listed.
4- Marketing research techniques and web usage analysis techniques.
(4) Participating in other activities such as any needed web development, exploitations and dissemination, Project management….etc.
Role in project
???
8.1.10. AzaharSC, Egypt
Organisation
Short Name
Logo
Systems and Computers Department
AlAzhar University
AzaharSC
Type:
University
Nature:
Academic
Country:
Role
ID
EGYPT
RTD
Core Business:
Systems and Computers Department at Al-Azhar University is a teaching and research department. The department certifies for
undergraduate and graduate students. There are many active groups in the department that are working on different fields including Artificial
Intelligence (AI) and Data Mining (DM). The team that is participating is this project has a respectful experience in the Web mining and AI
and has enormous number of publications in these fields.
Specific competences for the project:
Our team is an academic team that is specialist in Artificial Intelligence and Data Mining techniques and algorithms. The team consists of
two PhD students, three assistant professors and full professor from Al-Azhar University in Cairo. The team has a wide experience in expert
systems, context aware system, Data Mining as well as Web-Based technologies. Therefore, our rule in the SMASH-ITea will involve five
folds:





A pre analysis to the different available services that need to cooperate or combined together. We will design and implement
automatic smart agents that will be able to figure out the merging points between the available services. The agent is supposed to
apply suitable AI techniques to do so. In addition, our developed agents should recognize similar services that can easily link together;
may be with minimum adjustments.
Services; especially internet services, are frequently changing according to the business requirements. Our contribution to this part is
to attach a smart agent to each service that will b able to recognize the changes and adapt the merged services based on the new
added values in the two services. In addition, our agent is supposed to learn from previous merging experience; so next time might load
the suitable configuration (if any).
In the testing, we have our school labs that can be utilized for testing purposes outside of the developers’ environments.
As an academic group we will be able to help in the information dissemination phase and we already have experience in technical
writing and organizing conferences and workshops. In addition, our team will be glad to write a book about the project experiences. We
plan to develop courses to be taught to undergraduate and graduate students. In addition, we can participate in the project technical
documentation.
As a research University, we will be able to conduct the survey on the state of the art on Semantic Web technologies. In addition, due
to our experience in data mining, we will be able to develop efficient clustering techniques and strategies for the collected data from
different services.
Role in Project:
???
Proposal Part B: page 70 of 85
8.1.11. Eteration
8.1.12. Turkey2
8.1.13. Turkey3
Proposal Part B: page 71 of 85
8.1.14. Universities/Researchers
Describe field of interest, expertise in Software Technology which proves Research capabilities …
8.1.15. University of Twente, The Netherlands (TWENTE)
Organisation
Short Name
University of Twente
Twente
Logo
Type:
Nature:
Research
Academic
The Netherlands
Country:
Role
ID
Academic
2
Core Business:
The University of Twente (UT) is one of the three technical universities in The Netherlands. The UT is different from many other technical
universities in that it also includes more human-centered faculties on management, behavioural sciences and medicine.
The Human Media Interaction (HMI) research group is embedded in the faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mathematics, and Computer
Science of the UT. HMI is headed by Professor Anton Nijholt and consists of about 15 (including some part time) staff members, a group of
20- 25 temporary researchers (post-docs, junior researchers, and Ph.D. students) and some administrative, technical, and managerial
support. The department HMI of the UT has extensive knowledge and expertise in human-media interaction, multi-media processing,
biosignal processing, and visualization. This is illustrated through 100+ scientific publications each year, patent applications in these fields
and various tools and case studies as conducted each year. The majority of the staff of HMI has engineering degrees in either electrical
engineering, mathematics, computer science, or man-machine interaction.
Specific competencies for the project:
The group focuses on intelligent multimodal human computer interaction (HCI). At the UT, HMI is responsible for both research and teaching
in HCI and the main factor in a special research kernel on HCI in the ICT research institute of the UT (CTIT). The research activities that will
be utilized for SMASH are in the following areas: machine analysis of human multi-modal and multi-party interaction, multimedia retrieval
and presentation, and user centered design and evaluation. HMI managed WP1 in AMI and AMIDA, both FP6 - IP projects. HMI is the
leader of WP3 in SERA and WP4 in Semaine, both FP7-STREPs. HMI is the coordinator of PuppyIR, an FP7-STREP. HMI provided the cochair for one of the clusters in the Dutch Bsiks project ICIS.
Role in the project:
In the SMASH project, HMI will be responsible for the interaction between human and media. HMI will take a human-centered
perspective. HMI will be responsible for the interaction paradigm adopted in the project. Moreover, HMI will be responsible f or design
and visualization issues. User evaluation studies will also be conducted by HMI.
8.1.16. University of Cairo, EGYPT (FCI)
Organisation
Short Name
Logo
Faulty of computer and information,
Cairo university
FCI
Type:
University
Nature:
Academic
Country:
Role
ID
EGYPT
RTD
10
Core Business
The Faculty of computers and information attempts to develop the system of study, revaluating the curricula and applying the latest
educational systems that provide more participation and choice for students to study the subjects according to their abilities and desires.
Research concentrates on clearly articulated interdisciplinary research themes. A prime focus of our research is its generative value with
respect to national and regional technological contribution with strong links to the international research community.
Specific competences for the project:
As an academic person, I’m interested in the field of knowledge management in general, knowledge sharing, information retrieval, web
mining, quality assurance of KBSs and domain specific models. My participation in SMASH would assist in the research field and provide
experience research, development, integration and exploitation activities of research projects. Furthermore, I have participated in MAP-IT
Project: Knowledge Mapping of IT competencies in the Mediterranean region and dialogue fostering, which is funded by the European
Commission under the FP6 IST Programme. MAP-IT aims to highlight the opportunities for research collaboration in ICT between Europe
and Mediterranean regions.
Role in Project
???
Proposal Part B: page 72 of 85
8.1.17. Universidad Politécnica de Madrid, Spain (UPM)
Organisation
Short Name
Logo
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid
UPM
Type:
Nature:
Academic
Higher education
(University)
Country:
Role
ID
Spain
RTD
7
Core Business:
Universidad Politécnica de Madrid (UPM) is the oldest and largest Spanish technical university, with more than 4.000 faculty members,
around 38.000 undergraduate students and 6.000 postgraduates in 21 Schools of study. UPM benefits from the heritage of its schools: the
more ancient ones were founded in the 18th.century. Nowadays UPM’s Schools cover most of engineering disciplines, as well as
Architecture, Computer Science and Geodesy & Cartography. Moreover, UPM as a top quality academic establishment, has a strong
commitment to R&D and Innovation, boasting over 200 Research Units and over 10 Research Institutes and Technological Centres, and
contributing significantly to the international scientific community with a high number of journal papers, conference communications, and
PhD theses.
The UPM researchers have large expertise in research projects participation both at national and international level. The presence of UPM
in the international R&D arena is ensured by its consistent participation in various EU programmes. As UPM participation in the 6th
Framework Programme is concerned, the University has taken part in 149 European R&D projects with more than 25 M€ of funding received
from the European Commission. After the first three years of duration of the 7th Framework Programme the UPM has been recognized as
the Spanish University with the highest number of projects approved, with more than 107 projects and 26 M€ of funding.
Specific competences for the project:
The participation of the UPM in the project will be performed by members of the Computer Networks and Web Technologies Laboratory,
CoNWeT Lab (http://conwet.fi.upm.es). CoNWeT Lab focuses on the application of emerging Web technologies to services oriented
computing. CoNWeT gathered substantiated expertise in this area as a partner in several successfully completed and ongoing projects,
such as FAST (EU FP7), 4CaaSt (EU FP7), Eureka-Celtic’s MyMobileWeb or EzWeb, a NESSI strategic project. CoNWeT will bring
experience in Service Oriented Architectures, services mashups, semantic Web technologies and context-aware adaptation for Web content
and services.
Lately, CoNWeT research efforts have been aligned with the vision of the Future Internet focusing on several pillars, by means of Web 2.0
technologies (including mashups) and context-aware Web provisioning, to let people seamlessly access information and services regardless
of the technology. Internet of Services regarded as a worldwide ecosystem of services has been tackled by our efforts on providing a usercentric access layer to services by composite applications such as end-user and business mashups. As a member of the Morfeo Open
Source Community (http://www.morfeo-project.org/index.php?lang=en), UPM-CoNWeT has contributed to the development of Morfeo’s
open source services gadget / mashup development environment (FAST GVS, http://fast.morfeo-project.org) and platform (EzWeb,
http://ezweb.morfeo-project.org).
Role in project:
???
Proposal Part B: page 73 of 85
Annex A: SMASH-ITea in action: Seeing is believing
The overall scenario which will flow through the entire proposal and demonstrates what we are trying
to achieve is identified in the following story board. To achieve this scenario requires concrete
objectives which are identified in the final column and fully synchronize with the individual WP
objectives of Section Error! Reference source not found.. These are also illustrated in the
rchitecture overview of section Error! Reference source not found.
Again, one thing the proposal wants to make absolutely clear is that the story below, and in the other
use cases, are ILLUSTRATIVE ONLY. SMASH-ITea is *NOT* specific to these websites or users
partners. SMASH-ITea , by design, is for potential use on ’any’ website without further adaptation by
users or developers. ONLY drag-and-drop. In the case of applications (eg Outlook, iTUNES etc) and
devices, the specific templates (API to Service maps) will need to be written since these are
proprietary in nature. SMASH-ITea will contribute several of these
The Story; Before SMASH-ITea . Case 1: The Classic Scenario
Once upon a time…. “Hey mum, how’s the booking going?”
Nadine is a busy lady. She works all day and dreams of travel all night. Even a
weekend away is very special to her & her family but if she travels, it’s got to be
nice – sunny, warm and no rain. She’s English after all. This weekend she finally
has two free days and she wants to make a last minute holiday booking. She
doesn’t care where, but it has to be a cheap price and must be good weather!
That evening she goes to BARCELO.com hotel booking page to explore some
last minute deals. There are several available, but she needs to keep checking
the BBC Weather site for the forecast in these places. Paris? – No rainy for next
two weeks, Rome? – Possible but whats the weather on Sunday? She spends
the time flipping between travel and weather sites trying to remember all the
details and book that weekend away.
Why is this so hard? Children can make joined-up writing
…what about a joined-up web to make her life easy!
The Story; Before SMASH-ITea . Case 2: Today’s Research Scenario
Hey mum” says her IT-aware son. “Why are you wasting your time doing all that
flipping around? Haven’t you heard there are some great technologies out there
like the SOA4ALL project to make this easy for you? These sites are all about
services and you just need to connect them together”. “Sounds good and simple
son – show me how” she says. “Yeah, Cool man. It’s easy, you just need to
couple the context aware services, and you do this by opening the process editors
to find the pre-requisite services from the distributed repository systems and its all
based on SOA, aggregation ,federation, discovery and enabled all through a
SaaS approach and you can even add new services by annotating them.”
“It’s great - NOT! Only for nerds and geeks”
“Uulp. Do I need to wear a hoodie as well? I think I need to take a
break…somewhere hot and sunny and cheap. Help!!!”
The Story; WITH SMASH-ITea . Case 3: Tomorrows Research Scenario
“OK, Mum, What you need is SMASH-ITea ”
The Story…Happily Ever After
Note: This Story is an illustrative example only…the purpose will be to make this
happen in a completely generic way and not specific to anyone set of websites
User Action
SMASH-ITea Activities
Proposal Part B: page 74 of 85
SMASHITea
Objectiv
e
Nadine
Nadine is in her
UK office and
opens the
SMASH-ITea
Studio
website and
enters :
“I want to book a
hotel in a hot
place”
This didn’t
provide a result
so Nadine simply
selects the
Barcelo travel
website
O7.3
SMASH-ITea Reconstruction
O6-4
engine processes the request and
in conjunction with the
recommendation resources
suggests existing service
memories
NB: Normally the use would start
at the next step – but this helps
illustrate a later step
SMASH-ITea Recognition Engine
is triggered to examine service
SMASH-ITea storage memory is
examined to see if the specific
site/service is already known
SMASH-ITea Recommendation
systems suggest other enabled
sites or SMASH-ITea ed sites
SMASH-ITea Context Sensors
suggest adaptations of the specific
service
Semantic Recognition is used to
recognise individually service
elements
SMASH-ITea service is autobuilt
Service Definition is
created/established
User interaction to fine tune the
service definition
Service definitions are entered on
the federated storage for reuse
SMASH-ITea Auto gadget
functionality adapts the service
definition in to a Gadget for use in
other systems
O4-1
She then selects
the BBC
Weather website
SMASH-ITea Recognition and
Autobuild Engine is triggered to
provide service enablement [with a
similar process to the Barcelo
recognition]
O4-1
As for
Barcelo
website
She drags BBC
Weather on to
the Barcelo
website
SMASH-ITea Mashup and
Reconstruction engine is triggered
to initiate the visual and service
mapping process
SMASH-ITea storage memory is
examined to see if the compound
SMASH-ITea ed services are
already is already known
SMASH-ITea Recommendation
systems suggest other SMASH-
O7-1
Since decides
she might use
this service
elsewhere, such
as on a
dashboard or
desktop
Proposal Part B: page 75 of 85
O4-1
O5-3
O6-8
O4-8
O6-4
O5-5
O4-2
O6-6
O6.1
O4-2
O5-4
O4-2
O4-5
O4-7
O4-6
O5-1
O4-3
O7-7
O5-3
O7-6
O6-4
ITea ed sites
SMASH-ITea Context Sensors
suggest adaptations of the to-be
composed services
Semantic Recognition is used to
recognise and wire already
semantically enabled services
A visually SMASH-ITea ed service
is made
And created in the SMASH-ITea ed
service description format
Reconstructed service is
memorized via the repository
O5-5
O7-4
O6-1
O7-8
O5-4
O7-1
O7-5
O7-7
O6-6
O5-1
O8-1
And then she is
ready to make
her hotel booking
using the new
SMASH-ITea ed
service and type
pertinent context
information, “Fly
somewhere hot”,
into the visually
SMASH-ITea ed
site and hits
‘submit’
Since all has
worked perfectly,
Nadine provides
context
data/feedback to
SMASH-ITea
allowing others
to reutilise her
work
The SMASH-ITea Service
Execution engine controls the
interaction of the SMASH-ITea ed
services with the user data until all
services report back success
SMASH-ITea feedback systems
extracts context, usage and other
feedback information and stores
along with individual or SMASHITea ed services as Service
Memory recommendations of the
repository
O7-6
O6-9
O6-10
Some days later,
whilst on
business in
France, Nadine
now wonders if
the
recommendation
system has
really worked?
SMASH-ITea Context sensors
detect here login is an IP address
in France
O4-2
O6-2
So she speaks
into the stand
Microsoft
standard ‘speech
Recognition
utility “I want to
fly to somewhere
hot”
O7.3
SMASH-ITea Reconstruction
O6-5
engine processes the request and
O6-7
in conjunction with the
recommendation resources
suggests existing service
memories. In this case it means the
one above should be included on
the ‘found’ list
Proposal Part B: page 76 of 85
While looking for
next day’s
weather, she’s
pretty surprised
when SMASHITea updated the
parameters
because
Nadine’s now in
France
She makes a call
and her iPhone
iTunes
application is
detected
And then she is
prompted to drag
the iTunes on to
the SMASH-ITea
ed website.
Since Nadine
wonders if there
are any concerts
for bands she
likes that day
she does so
Where they
become an ‘as
one’ mashup
Service with the
Barcelo and BBC
Weather site
There’s no
bands she likes
on so doesn’t
bother dragging
in the ticketing
site.
Nadine also sees
that SMASHITea suggests to
use another
recommended
mashup-up
service which
already connects
her windows
media player
with flight site
Skycanner.net
The default information in the
Sites/Services is adapted to fit her
new context
O6-3
SMASH-ITea Recognition Engine
is triggered to examine service
A suitable template is found in
conjunction with SMASH-ITea
Resources
SMASH-ITea Context Sensors
suggest adaptations of the specific
service
SMASH-ITea Recommendation
systems suggest other enabled
sites or SMASH-ITea ed sites
SMASH-ITea Mashup and
Reconstruction engine is triggered
to initiate the visual and service
mapping process
O4-1
O4-4
Adapted and reconstructed service
is memorized via the repository
O7-2
O5-3
O4-1
O5-2
O4-2
O6-1
O6-6
O7-6
O6-4
O5-5
O7-1
As for
Barcelo
– BBC
SMASHITea ed
site
Recommendation functionality, with O6-4
O5-5
input from context, is used to
present other options
Proposal Part B: page 77 of 85
Some days later,
when Nadine is
on the system
again
SMASH-ITea provides controlled
access to a users space
O6-6
She gets a
notification that
Barcelo Hotels
has a special
offer in
Barcelona and
with click she
accepts the
information of
the SMASH-ITea
ed service and
books that
holiday!
Technically
Related
Service
Adaptation
SMASH-ITea process engine also
supports long-tailed service and
controls the interaction with
existing SMASH-ITea ed services
and exiting context/entered data
(whilst respecting privacy)
O8-2
O5-1
As software changes SMASH-ITea
will ensure an auto-upgrade of
browser plug-ins
This will manage the overall
interaction of all SMASH-ITea
components
O8-3
Software
Integration
Proposal Part B: page 78 of 85
O8-4
Annex B: High-Level Technical Architecture
SMASH-ITea consists of several components, which are highlighted below and with a visualisation of
the architecture shown on the following page. All components will interact in the “SMASH-ITea cloud”
as a Service, incorporating infrastructure as a service (IaaS), platform as a service (PaaS) and
software as a service (SaaS), according to the well established Service Oriented Architecture (SOA).
.The ‘O’ numbers relate to the specific workpackage objectives of the story board.
SMASH-ITea consists of various components that are working hand in hand in order to realize the
SMASH-ITea functionalities.








The SMASH-ITea Recognition Engine is the main component of the SMASH-ITea environment
as it allows SMASH-ITea to automatically analyze a website or devise and to recognize services
automatically based on the content. This component has a direct user interaction and will be a key
pillar for success in SMASH-ITea .
The SMASH-ITea Context Engine will be used as input for SMASH-ITea to consider data from
personal devices and contextual user information both for the recognition and reconstruction
engine.
The SMASH-ITea Recommendation Engine will provide an automatic recommendation of
services to the user – individual and composed. Users may choose those services in their
processes and may also see feedback of other users (social aspect) such as ratings and
comments.
All data, including recommendations and feedback is managed by a SMASH-ITea Federated
Repository, which called the SRRN which has been developed by the popular FP6 SEEMseed
and SEAMLESS projects and has been extended by the EU STASIS project. It provides a
distributed semantic P2P network for storing and managing all information and therefore acts as a
memory of SMASH-ITea .
The SMASH-ITea Semantic Engine will extract semantic information from websites and as such
will have a strong connection to the SMASH-ITea Recognition Engine described earlier. It will reutilize and refine components from existing project STASIS
Within the SMASH-ITea Security and Privacy component, security and privacy issues are
handles. This is considering user feedback information and information about the credibility of
service providers.
The SMASH-ITea Reconstruction Engine adds the feedback of all components into a joint
process composition. This includes the rebuilt service from the Recognition Engine.
The SMASH-ITea Process Management component allows users to define the processes within
SMASH-ITea . For example, when connecting a weather.com to hotel.com then the user can
freely choose whether the process should be to first search for all cities >30°C and then look at
the hotel booking site or weather to first search the hotel booking site for cheap hotels and then
filter by temperature
Proposal Part B: page 79 of 85
External
O65
O63
O61
Context
Engine
O74
Semantic
Engine
Format
O42
AutoGadget
O47
O610
O43
O43
O62
Recognition
Engine
O71
O42
O72
O45
Autobuilt
Enabled
Services
O53
Application
Device
Reconstruct
Engine
SFE of
Composed
Services
O52
O44
Template
Engine
Recommendation
Template
Memory
O64
O67
O46
O47
Security /
Privacy
O55
O51
Composed
O53
Autobuilt
enabled
Services
Templates
Device
Application
Page 1 of 85
O81
O82
Customisze
Integrate
SRRN
Federated Repository
O52
Memories
Process
Management
O77
Recommend
Engine
Context
Engine
Individual
Updates
O78
Website
KEY
O73
O73
Input
Modalities
O54
O41
O75
O55
O83
O84
O69
Recommendations
Individual
Composed
Based on the ITEA 2 PO template v5.0 (Jan. 2010)
Annex C: Use Cases
Follows are some potential use cases for SMASH-ITea. These are illustrative only but serve to show some
elements of what might be possible. Use case development itself is in WP9 starting off with the use case
definition, which also feeds requirements, Tasks 9.1.
Internet of Services: Tourism Sector - Barcelo Use Case
1. Rationale
Tourism has been one of the main driving forces in terms of B2C and ecommerce and many services are constantly published. But end-users
have to organise the various services manually. This use case is focused
on contextualised and user-friendly service mash-up that combines travel
and extra services according to user preferences. Travellers may use
their mobile phones, PDAs or laptops to access services and information
that are relevant for them in their journey. This use case parallels
Nadine’s use case above.
2. Use Case
The modern environment is flooded with various applications and devices that can offer various
services. Pervasive intelligence can make a huge difference to the end user if they can interact with
them in a friendly way. And of course the real power is comming when such systems are
interconnected via services; “SMASHed-up” services.
While on a leisure journey with Nurias family, the car navigating system will know where to stop at a
shopping mall as it knows wife’s preferences and a family budget, kids will get their stop at an
attraction park and her partner will enjoy his favourite music on the radio.
Below it is a rough initial scatch of the use case that will be developed further on under T9.3.1 and will
set up a vision of SMASHed in the Internet of Services.
• The user, Nuria, opens a travel portal from her computer Nuria indicates that she wants to travel for
her leisure. According to the user’s context, history of interaction user preferences, the relevant
web service mash-up is recommended if it exists.
• The user wishes to fly to a sunny place close to a beach on her pre-scheduled vacation dates and
uses SMASH-ITEA to graphically wire the services together.
• The system offers different destinations and tickets. Nuria selects the most desired ones
• The system provides an automatic upload of an e-ticket on the user's PDA, and offers different 4stars hotels close to the beach based on the user budget and previous hotels choices.
• Then she is asked if she would like to book a taxi to go from the airport to the hotel since SMASHITEA has recognised previous users storing similar services in the SMASH-ITEA repository.
• The system renders an already SMASHed interface that has already be composed by another user
but now includes a local taxi provider website. It s offers multiple options. The user selects a taxi
service and this taxi journey is added to her reservations.
• As the system is aware that the user’s favourite jazz-band will give a concert while the user stay at
her resort, she is offered with a ticket to this event at an affordable price. The user chooses to buy
an e-ticket for the concert, and the system selects a ticket based on the user requirements for
concerts (seat, close to the stage, good visibility). She pays for it by dragging on here eWallet
• During the travel, the system unobtrusively provides information about the status of all the
reservations. The user is also provided with local leisure services related to his interests: cinema,
museums, sports. The system will automatically track user activities and with user’s confirmation
update massages and upload photographs from her iPhone in her favourite social web services
such as Facebook or Twitter.
Internet of Content: Publishing Sector – SOLE24 Use Case
1. Rationale
Proposal Part B: page 2 of 85
Many isolated web services are available in a news and factual
information area. This use case illustrates a composition of services that
provide a relevant assistance for a user context and preferences when
share dealing. This use case also promotes an integration of services
related to the users business interests and objectives The services mashup provides a seamless and user-friendly interaction taking different media
sources and composing them together
2. Use Case
Personalizing information for an end-user is one of the most important trends in the Internet right now
and certianly so in the publishing and news industry. There are some solutions for personalization of
web pages that filters out content based on a users pforiles but there are only vey few that can
adaptively generate a unique and personally adjusted content.
This use case illustrates s composition of services that delivers a unique content to a particular user in
order to satisfy his informational needs. The use case considers the personal interests and
preferences of Sven, his level of knowledge in different areas , as well as his interaction habbits in
order to create a composition of related and interesting contents useful for the reader, and excluding
all that are not relevant.
Below it is a rough initial scatch of the use case that will be developed further on under T9.4.1 and will
set up a vision of SMASHed in the Internet of Content.
•
Sven opens the web portal from its computer and sees a dialogue in his personal share service
portal
• He selects the most interesting topics for him today day (eg: a financial news regarding quarterly
results) and the system knows that his is mainly interested in companys in his portfolio which is
related to Restaurants.
• There are lot of sub topics related to these news items, e.g. coming from different sources, at
different level of details, factual reports, interviews, etc. But Sven wants some further information
on one of them. His shares are down...lots of technical information on the finances but what is the
real story?
• He drops the items on to the SOLE24 Financial News Site which then SMASHes and gets a series
of interesing articles – apparently its a health and safety scare
• SMASH-ITEA provides a good services, so he provides his feedback on this composition so it is
able to reconfigure itself in order to suggest other topics more related to that opinion.
• Then Svens wonders who is in charge of this company now, so he drops the news ticker on to the
Companies House statutory website and he is presented with the company details, and when
dropping on the ‘whos-who’ website get a biography of a CEO.
• He them moves on a drops that biography onto YouTube. Interesting SMASHs generate the
video on you tube which a customer has taken on their mobile phone of the state of the kitchens
• The user decides, based on the digested information, not to to invest in that compan
Internet of Things: Transportation Sector - Thales Use Case
1. Rationale
There are a number of web services for transportation domain currently
presented on the market. All of them are not interconnected and thus do
not bring users the most out of their potential benefits if working together.
This use case illustrates a composition of services that provide a relevant
support for the user taking into account a user’s context while in a journey.
This use case focuses on the tailoring of services and their compositions
to the user’s personal interest and preferences in an Internet of Things
context, i.e. devices around the user are espoused as services, and on the
one hand they communicate to update software user model and on the
other hand and can act in a physical world where can effect user’s actions
and behaviour. Foreseen interaction environment is user-friendly and
seamless presented via mashups available to the user on his PDAs and
Smartphones.
2. Use Case
As technology scales toward efficient and powerful microprocessors the wave of devices that bring
Proposal Part B: page 3 of 85
electronic chips on board varying in their computational powers from “simple” RFDI markers to new
powerful PDA’s. These devices can communicate to each other connecting into networks able of
solving complex problems, physically challenged people and doing much more.
This is currently known as ambient intelligence that acts in a pervasive envoronment of services
located on many different devices found around humans. Nevertheless, making hardware available as
a service is still cumbersome and time consuming task that usually is solved in an adhoc manner by
every company or individual. To take full advantage of this environment is a challange that can be
attacked from different angels including new facilities for discovery and mashing-up those services.
Below it is a rough initial scatch of the use case that will be developed further on under T9.3.1 and will
set up a vision of SMASHed in the Internet of Things.
• The user, Jean, opens the web portal on their computer and is presented with a dialogue.
According to the users current context, i.e. information from SMASH-ITEA service memory and
user and device models, SMASH-ITEA will propose the most relevant mash-ups.
• Jean wants to book a train ticket and system instantly proposes her to go from his home office
where he is now, to the headquarters of his company, as he does every Friday.
• When an e-ticket is bought it is automatically uploaded to Jean’s PDA
• The system is knows that the user will be at the headquarters just before a week end, and it is also
aware of a weather for coming days. So new services are displayed on the portal according to this
context, and bicycle rental is proposed to him. The user is also provided with leisure and shopping
services related to his usual week-end interests.
• Based on the traffic situation, and the delivery status of his new sailboard, he selects a rental car
with roof-rack that is available at 18:00 near the sailboard station, and books a bike to go from the
headquarters to the sailboard station.
• The user is asked whether he wants to open a part of his profile about car preferences to this
renting company. Since he accepts this, a car will be adjusted to him (rear mirror, seat position,
radio, etc.) and a list of his favourite radio stations along with his musical preferences will be
uploaded to the car’s radio.
Proposal Part B: page 4 of 85
Annex D: SMASH-ITEA: Technology Principles
SMASH-ITEA consists of several components, which have been described in the last section. The precise
definition of suitable technologies for their implementation will be part of the project and will be performed
during the research phases of the corresponding workpackages. They will strongly be influenced by the
requirements definition and State of the Art analysis of Workpackage 2 however already precise potential
technologies and SOTA is described in both the Research Section SOTA.. However, there are certain basic
statements that can be made about the technological background of SMASH-ITEA, which will be highlighted
as follows:

Services
SMASH-ITEA will be wrapped around services. The main purpose of SMASH-ITEA is to make the
provisioning, composition and execution of services as easy as possible. SMASH-ITEA will convert
virtually every page in the web to a service. As such, services and service related technologies such as
RESTful service frameworks and (SOAP based) WebServices are key technological principles in the
project.

Service Front Ends
SMASH-ITEA will offer users the ability to interact with and adapt services and service compositions in an
intuitive way. It will support End-User Programming of intelligent systems without the need for a
background in software engineering or artificial intelligence, leveraging debugging principles of machinelearned programs.

Mashup / Composition
SMASH-ITEA will not be a classical mashup or process composition editor but SMASH-ITEA will follow
the same idea: Making it as easy as possible to connect two or more services in a graphical userorientated, and expected intuitive way.

Context
SMASH-ITEA will actively use context information such as information from various devices (e.g.
iPhones, cameras, GPS receivers, etc.). SMASH-ITEA will use user context information when combining
two of more websites or other service assets.

Web Based Tools / Applications
All prototypes that require user interaction will be created as web based tools / applications. In addition to
this, SMASH-ITEA will also be using Web Based Applications in order to analyze them and extract
service information.

Web 2.0 Oriented
All user interfaces will be based on modern Web 2.0 technologies such as Ajax. Rich Internet Application
Frameworks (RIA) such as the Google Web Toolkit will form the baseline for this technology. SMASHITEA will be usable instantly and the main SMASH-ITEA component - the SMASH-ITEA Studio will be
wrapped around those technologies and principles. - In addition to this, SMASH-ITEA will also follow
other Web 2.0 principles such as e.g. social networking functionalities.

Service Recognition
SMASH-ITEA will use various technologies from the processing domain in order to recognize, classify
and combine services. As such, an automatic analysis and service recognition is a key factor in SMASHITEA.

Semantics
All content and information of SMASH-ITEA will be based on semantic information. Services will be
annotated with semantics and SMASH-ITEA will use those semantic information in order to combine and
select services.

Interoperability
In order to realize SMASH-ITEA, all services need to interact. As such, interoperability principles are a
main element of the SMASH-ITEA approach. This includes things like ontology matching, mapping and
alignment.
Proposal Part B: page 5 of 85
Annex E: References
[1] L. Xuanzhe, H. Yi, and L. Haiqi, “Towards Service Composition Based on Mashup,” in Proceedings of
the IEEE Congress on Services, Salt Lake City, UT, July 2007, pp. 332 – 339
[2] E. Ort, S. Brydon, and M. Basler, “Mashup Styles, Part 1: Server-Side Mashups,” Sun Developer
Network (SDN), Tech. Rep., May 2007. [Online].Available:
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/J2EE/mashup_1/
[3] “Mashup Styles, Part 2: Client-Side Mashups,” Sun Developer Network (SDN), Tech. Rep., August
2007. [Online]. Available: http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/J2EE/mashup_2/
[4] S. Cetin, N. Ilker Altinas, H. Oguztuzun, A. Dogru, O. Tufekci, and S. Suloglu, “Legacy Migration to
Service-Oriented Computing with Mashups,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on
Software Engineering Advances (ICSEA 2007), Cap Estere, France, August 2007.
[5] J. Novak and B. J. J. Voigt, “Mashups: Structural Characteristics and Challenges of End-User
Development in Web 2.0,” in i-Com, vol. 6, no. 1,2007, pp. 19 – 24.
[6] H.-J. Jin and H.-C. Lee, “Web Services Development Methodology Using the Mashup Technology,” in
Proceedings of the International Conference on Smart Manufacturing Application (ICSMA 2008),
Goyang-Si, South Korea, April 2008, pp. 559 – 562.
[7] D. Merrill. (2006) Mashups: The new breed ofWeb app. [Online]. Available:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/xml/library/x-mashups.html
[8] C. Pettey and L. Goasduff. (2006) Gartner’s 2006 Emerging Technologies Hype Cycle Highlights Key
Technology Themes. [Online]. Available: http://www.gartner.com/it/page.jsp?id=495475
[9] M. Ogrinz, Mashup Patterns: Designs and Examples for the Modern Enterprise. Reading, MA:
Addison Wesley Professional, 2009 (est.).
Proposal Part B: page 6 of 85