DAPSI call deadline 20/01/2021

Received today:

You are invited to our first technical workshop organized by Fraunhofer IAIS. In this session, Abdel will give a presentation about `Linked Data & Semantic Web Technologies’.
The agenda will be:

  • Ontology development
  • Hands-on using Protégé
  • SPARQL query language
  • Existing technologies
    The attendance is mandatory.
    Regards,

Received today:

Dear all,

In collaboration with NGI TETRA we are organising a workshop according to your interests. Help us to define it with the topics you choose.

Some options:

    Community engagement
    Funding for open source
    Visibility for non-profit and open source projects
    Crowdfunding
    Consumer and digital rights

Essentially we can plan for different specialized topics within the broad topics or you can also suggest other topics to be included (and we will check if it is possible).

Please, reply to this email indicating the topic(s) of interest (if any) by this week.

Best regards,

Received today:

Dear all,

we are experiencing some issues with our cloud infrastructure (https://cloud.lab.fiware.org/). Our technicians are working hard to recover soon the hardware crash but for a while, the infrastructure will remain down.

We would also take “advantage” of this situation to make a big upgrade to the last version of OpenStack in order to offer you an even better experience once everything will be back up and running.

In the meantime… For those of you who were using FIWARE Lab as an experimental/production environment, we can move your resources toward a different node of the federation (for you nothing change, it is just an internal shift of resources).

Please, contact me and I will take care of this procedure!

Also, for those of you who didn’t participate yet to the DAPSI webinars, we are re-arranging the sessions according to this situation. I will let you know soon the new dates.

And last but not least, once again, if you need any technical help, we can arrange one-to-one sessions about FIWARE Lab, FIWARE Generic Enablers, Docker, and more in general, any support on the development side of your solution!

Thanks for your patience,

Received today:

Dear Participants,
See you all tomorrow. Please send me your lean canvases if not already sent, and if you’d like me to review something particular, do let me know too. Tomorrow is Experimentation, a very sought after topic and usually a lot of peer learning to take away from here.

Attached is the Lean Canvas/Deconstruct your business Excel again.

Cheers

Deconstruct Your business.xlsx (31.4 KB)

@dachary could you share the attached file :slight_smile: ?

Is that this one https://cloud.fedeproxy.eu/f/4690 ?

I uploaded it without looking at it. Possibly the same document indeed. Sorry for overlooking the attachment :slight_smile:

1 Like

I will complete it and send it right now, thanks !

The value proposition canvas part was already filled, I slightly updated it and send it by mail to Farid (with Loic in CC).

Deconstruct Your business-fedeproxy.xlsx (26.8 KB)

1 Like

This morning, I followed the [DAPSI] Linked data & semantic web technologies meeting.
Some notes:

  • This videoconference required to install Microsoft meet (an account wasn’t required). The web client wasn’t working at all.
  • There were two presentations, one focused on RDF and protege and the other one on OWL. Some SPARQL sample queries were shared.
  • I encountered an internet connection issue at the very end of the meeting, I asked by mail to the organizer if I missed a list of homework to do before the next session or if an attendee list was shared at the very end ?
1 Like

Mail received today:

Invitation July 9th, 2021 10:00-12:00

Dear all,

In the next workshop I will give a presentation about “Introduction to GDPR and data subject’s rights”. The rough agenda will be:

  • What’s new in GDPR?​
  • What are individual rights?​
  • Lawful basis for processing​
  • Playing around with some interactive tools for GDPR compliance​

Attendance is mandatory.

Reply sent today:

Hi,

Would it be possible to setup the videoconference on a service hosted with Free Software such as https://jitsi.org/ or https://bigbluebutton.org? It would be a nice fit since Jitsi was selected to be funded by NGI[0].

I apologize for this request and would fully understand if you do not provide alternatives. I’m a Free Software vegetarian[1], meaning I do not use proprietary software, even when they are awesome. Very much like a vegetarian would not eat meat, even when it is delicious :slight_smile: It is an ethical and personal choice I made years ago and it sometimes causes problems.

If there is no way to join the meeting other than Microsoft Teams, I could watch the recording afterwards or join using a regular phone number. It’s just an idea though: I’m trying to find all imaginable ways to participate without using proprietary software.

Thanks a lot for your understanding and I look forward to finding the best possible solution.

Cheers

[0] https://nlnet.nl/project/JitsiMeet-E2E/
[1] https://blog.dachary.org/2020/12/19/looking-for-a-free-software-vegetarian-developer-position/

The DAPSI Experimentation week 4 homework:
image

Other project benefiting from the grant voiced the same concern:

Seconded. But for the both the reasons above and that Teams works extremely badly on Apple hardware…

and

seconded. We also had troubles with Teams on Linux and had to revert to mobile phone eventually.

and the organizer replied:

Hello,

I really appreciate your concern. I think that you are fighting for a great cause!

I will be happy to try a new service. I took a look, and it seems a pretty easy platform to use. I will update the invitation with the new link:
https://meet.jit.si/DAPSI-2ndTechnicalWorkshop-GDPR

It should be OK with this link, right? I could not find any option for scheduling a specific time and date.

Best,

1 Like

Mail received today:

Dear fedeproxy team,

I send to you a detailed document explaining the evaluation process that will take place in September to assess you progress and do the payments accordingly.

If you have any question or you think an adjustment is needed for the technical KPIs, you can contact the technical coaches: Najmehsadat and Abderrahmane in cc of this email.

If you have any question for the business KPIs, you can contact the business coach: Augustin in cc of this email.

For general questions, you can contact me or my colleagues Daniel and Natalia.

Best regards,

DAPSI_Round2_PAYMENTS_final version_210627 - 11fedeproxy.pdf (1.1 MB)

I replied today:

Dear [redacted],

The proposal template proposal reads under the “2/ Excellence/innovation” section, I quote "Explain the exploitation potential of your project: if you plan a Commercial exploitation, non-commercial but with a relevant contribution to the internet community, or other.

In the fedeproxy proposal “2/ Excellence/innovation” there is no commercial exploitation or business mentioned, only the “relevant contribution to the internet community”. The fedeproxy proposal does not mention any commercial or business application anywhere else in the context of the call.

In the original call for applicants guidelines the page 21 reads, I quote: “These KPIs will measure the technological advance, the progress in the business strategy if any, but also the commitment and involvement of the teams (i.e. attending periodic call meetings with the coaches, meeting the deadlines for reporting, etc).” with an emphasis, on my part, on “if any” since fedeproxy does not include a business part.

As a consequence it is my understanding that the fedeproxy project is not required to meet any business KPI since it does not plan a commercial exploitation and that it was selected based on a proposal that does not include anything related to business or commercial exploitation.

Would you please be so kind as to confirm the fedeproxy will not be graded based on business KPI as presented in the document you sent in this email?

Cheers

Response received today:

Hi Loic

thank you for your email. We perfectly understand your worries.

The grid with KPIs was validated by the European Commission and it applies to all the selected projects.

The situation you mentioned I know it as soon as we already discussed together and a had a clear feedback from your coach [redacted], my colleague.

As soon as you have participate to all the sessions and the asked deliverables has been done we consider that on the “business part”, even if is not necessary the main point in your proposal, the work has been started.

I definitely hope that in the future strategy of the development of your project you will take in consideration all this inputs that you received.

It’s very important because those points you still have to present in September in front of our jury (half business and half tech).

All my best

Augustin

Replied today:

Hi,

Thanks for your quick reply, I’m sure we will resolve this issue :slight_smile:

On 06/07/2021 09:10, [redacted] wrote:

Hi Loic

thank you for your email. We perfectly understand your worries.
The grid with KPIs was validated by the European Commission and it applies to all the selected projects.

There must be a provision to exempt non-commercial proposals from business KPIs: they are mutually exclusive. The fedeproxy proposal is non-commercial and was accepted as such. The call was explicitly open to non-commercial projects.

The situation you mentioned I know it as soon as we already discussed together and a had a clear feedback from your coach, my colleague.

Yes. And we had fruitful discussions on how to reach out to the potential fedeproxy user base, in a non-commercial context. We did not discuss anything related to business because fedeproxy is a non-commercial project.

As soon as you have participate to all the sessions and the asked deliverables has been done we consider that on the “business part”, even if is not necessary the main point in your proposal, the work has been started.

On that occasion and in writing (mail thread “DAPSI Session 3 and pre work”, June 5th, 2021) I objected that the requested deliverable are not meaningful for the fedeproxy project, for the same reason I’m objecting today. For instance the deliverable had items such as “CUSTOMER SEGMENT”, “Target customer”, “Path to customers” which have no meaning in a non-commercial environment. The participation to the sessions were mandatory, reason why we attended. But the content of the sessions were irrelevant to fedeproxy because they exclusively focused on business and did not contain anything related to non-commercial projects.

I definitely hope that in the future strategy of the development of your project you will take in consideration all this inputs that you received.
It’s very important because those points you still have to present in September in front of our jury (half business and half tech).

It would be a contradiction for a non-commercial project to be evaluated based on business KPI, because business and non-commercial are mutually exclusive. How can we resolve this?

Cheers

In preparation to the mentoring session scheduled tomorrow I sent the following mail to the mentor:

Hi,

After receiving the business KPI grid from the DAPSI organization this week I better understand why you insisted on discussing the “business case” during tomorrow’s meeting. I very much look forward to our discussion but I would like to clearly state in writing that I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding on the scope of the fedeproxy project. This was also discussed with [redacted] in the context of another mail thread.

The fedeproxy project is non-commercial and therefore does not have any business aspect: the two are mutually exclusive. The DAPSI call for proposal explicitly allows for non-commercial proposals and the fedeproxy proposal that was accepted does not contain any business aspect. As a consequence fedeproxy is, by definition, not subject to the business KPI grid.

The logic that you proposed in the business case gave me an idea that is very valuable and extremely simple: use quantitative measures to convince existing forges to give fedeproxy a try. I developed this idea in a draft communication plan[0]. Thank you for that!

Here is the agenda you proposed with links to the relevant resources to help with our discussion tomorrow:

Cheers

[0] DRAFT: communication plan

The technical evaluation bullet list extracted from DAPSI_Round2_PAYMENTS_final version_210627 - 11fedeproxy.pdf (1.1 MB)


One comprehensive list has been defined for all third parties. In order to define such a list, all
deliverables/milestones from the proposals have been collected and grouped into high-level categories
for a semi-common evaluation systems for all the projects.

  • For documents, research reports etc:
    • Is it well documented?
    • Does the document respect GDPR compliance requirements?
    • Does the document describe the functionalities for the considered subdomain (Service Portability, Data Interoperability and compatibility, Security and Privacy)?
    • Are the state of the art effort studied and going to be exploited (standards, existing tools, analysis studies, etc.)?
  • For use case documents:
    • The quality and completeness of the identified stakeholders
    • The procedure of user requirements collection
  • Functional & Technical Requirement / Software Development Roadmap:
    • Are you satisfied with data exchange protocol e.g. mapping?
    • Are the existing solutions going to be exploited and customized? E.g., extensions of the existing API, extension for SOLID, etc.
    • Are you satisfied with data description and metadata, e.g. data catalog, W3C vocabularies?
  • For architecture:
    • Does the architecture answer the requirements set by the customer?
    • Does the architecture include functions of the considered subdomain (Service Portability, Data Interoperability and compatibility, Security and Privacy)?
    • Does the architecture consider the well-established specifications e.g. data model
  • For UI/Prototype design Qualitative assessment:
    • Attractiveness: Overall impression of the product. Do you like or dislike it?
    • Perspicuity: Is it easy to get familiar with the product and to learn how to use it?
    • Efficiency: Can you solve their tasks without unnecessary effort? Does it react fast?
    • Dependability: Do you feel in control of the interaction? Is it secure and predictable?
    • Stimulation: Is it exciting and motivating to use the product? Is it fun to use?
    • Novelty: Is the design of the product creative? Does it catch your interest?
  • For prototype/implementation:
    • How many functionalities have been implemented?
    • are all the functionalities considered in the “functional requirement analysis” phase implemented properly?
    • Are you satisfied with the Open-source framework considered?
  • Does the design respect all GDPR compliance requirements?
  • What is the quality of data model implemented (API, standards, solid, providers, interfaces, etc.)
  • Is the communication secured by the system?
    • Are the encryption and authentication well-maintained?
      If applicable:
    • Is any access control procedure implemented?
    • Easy to deploy on any device?
    • How is the final prototype tested? what is the Technology Readiness Level?
    • How many transactions per second can the software manage?
    • What is the response time?
    • What additional contexts need to be considered in the future?