[ecop-poct] Re: Updated PO v0.5
- From: Bernhard Schätz <schaetz@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: ecop-poct@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 31 Mar 2011 11:56:13 +0200
Dear Jouni,
I agree -- SODA is outdated. I'll provide you with some sentences on SOCRADES,
eSONIA, iFEST and Pollux (all ARTEMIS projects instead).
Give me 10 mins....
Am 31.03.2011 um 11:32 schrieb Mattila Jouni:
> Dear Bernhard,
>
> thanks, for SODA and SOCRATES …. ??? SODA is very old. TUT was in it too (not
> me/us) …
>
> I found
>
> FTPOnline Don't Let SODA Ruin Your SOA Retrieved on July 6, 2007
>
> Can someone write please 2-3 sentences about socrates and soda for reference
> for section 2?
>
> Thank you,
> -J
>
> Jouni Mattila
> Professor in Machine Automation, Dr. Tech.
> TUT/IHA
> Korkeakoulunkatu 6
> P.O. Box 589
> FI-33101 Tampere, Finland
> Mobile +358-40-8490244
> Fax +358-3-31152240
> Email: jouni.mattila@xxxxxx
> www.iha.tut.fi
>
> From: ecop-poct-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ecop-poct-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Bernhard Schätz
> Sent: 31. maaliskuuta 2011 12:28
> To: ecop-poct@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ecop-poct] Re: Updated PO v0.5
>
> Dear Jouni,
>
> as you said, impact is supposed to go to section 4.
>
> The POC are very good to define measurable and verifiable objectives! Good
> job!!
>
> One comment: In Demo #3, I would use the term "autonomous motion control" vs.
> "robotic motion control", but then this is a matter of taste.
>
> I'll go through section 2 immediately.
>
> Best regards!
>
>
> Am 31.03.2011 um 11:07 schrieb Mattila Jouni:
>
>
> Thanks, I actually removed impact ”talk” from section 2 since I thought it
> supposed go in section 4 (only) ok no problem thanks.
>
> Please check out section 2 (actually 2.1 concept and objectives is about
> ready) ….
>
> Since concept and objectives should be stated in “measurable and verified
> form” I wrote a list of tentative demos (POC) …
>
> I don’t think these are very binding, however, pls let me know if you agree
> on these or not for this PO stage … ?
>
> Are these the “most” critical ones in terms of S&T to demonstrate? (attached
> and below)
>
> Cheers,
>
> -J
>
>
>
> The ECO PREMISES project is led by the four world market leader OEM’s. With
> their key role the mobile working machine domain requirements for set of use
> cases are elicited, analyzed and validated, a domain model is build and
> general reference architecture requirements are mapped out. In addition,
> requirements for model-driven design process and tool chain are mapped out
> for ECO PREMISES design approach development. After S&T phase, the developed
> ECO PREMISES concept will be validated by developing 3-4 industrial scale
> proof-of-concept (POC) OEM machine demonstrations. These POC’s demonstrate
> (roughly):
>
> 1. Demo #1: Inter-machine and intra-machine communication via MSB and
> SOA broker (e.g. fleet management)
> 2. Demo #2: Architectural separation of hard real-time functionality
> from the service-based functionality so that the critical real-time behavior
> is not affected while preserving system-level predictability and appropriate
> levels of safety. (e.g. performance of SOA vs. domain requirements)
> 3. Demo #3: Advanced machine functionality demonstration with software
> configurable level of intelligence (e.g. robotic motion control vs. manual
> control or maintenance at different levels)
> 4. Demo #4: Model-based development and tool chain demonstration vs.
> product-line management (software variability management)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Jouni Mattila
> Professor in Machine Automation, Dr. Tech.
> TUT/IHA
> Korkeakoulunkatu 6
> P.O. Box 589
> FI-33101 Tampere, Finland
> Mobile +358-40-8490244
> Fax +358-3-31152240
> Email: jouni.mattila@xxxxxx
> www.iha.tut.fi
>
> From: ecop-poct-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:ecop-poct-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> On Behalf Of Bernhard Schätz
> Sent: 31. maaliskuuta 2011 11:38
> To: ecop-poct@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [ecop-poct] Re: Updated PO v0.5
>
> Dear all,
>
> one short comment, which might be helpful for section 2 and 4:
> In the AWP (Annual work Program) for all three subprogrammes (ASP5, ASP1,
> ASP4) objectives and expected impacts are listed.
> It helps to support the reviewers in finding keywords in the corresponding
> text of these sections.
>
> Here is an example for ASP 1:
>
> In section 2, you might want to consider to prominently place objectives,
> e.g., by printing them in italic; e.g.,
> - contribution to a European Standard Reference Technology Platform,
> definition of a model-based compositional develoment process including safety
> and security aspects, design and prototype implementation of a multi-domain
> embedded systems architecture addressing networking, security, robustness,
> diagnosis and maintenance services
>
> In Section 4, you might want to do the same for the expected impacts required
> in this section, e.g.,
> - reduce time to market; increase the quality and reliability of products and
> services while providing novel functionalities; contribute to architectures
> that reduce cost and effort of qualification and certification processes.
>
> So, while all this already is in the content of these sections, sometimes it
> helps just to repeat some of the keywords and make them stand out.
>
> Best regards!!
>
>
> Am 31.03.2011 um 10:16 schrieb Olli Vistbacka:
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Updated PO attached.
>
> It’s almost complete information wise.
>
> TODO:
> - Section 2 condensing
> - Section 4 improvement, some material is available (e.g. impact statements
> from Bernhard and FAGOR, listed standards, )
> - Abstract improving?
> - getting missing information
>
> I have understood that section 2 is under editing in TUT. Am I correct?
> Is somebody working on the Section 4? Pandeli?
>
> --
> Olli Vistbacka
> Project Manager, M.Sc. (Eng.)
>
> Phone +358 40 569 1043
> olli.vistbacka@xxxxxxxxx
> http://www.hermia.fi/in_english/
>
> <ECO_PREMISES_PO_v0.5.docx>
>
> Bernhard Schätz, fortiss GmbH, email: schaetz@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Tel. +49 (0)89 360 35 22 27 Fax. +49 (0)89 360 35 22 50
> Guerickestr. 25, 80805 München, Germany
>
>
>
>
> <ECO PREMISES PO v0 4-comments_fortiss_joma.docx>
>
> Bernhard Schätz, fortiss GmbH, email: schaetz@xxxxxxxxxxx
> Tel. +49 (0)89 360 35 22 27 Fax. +49 (0)89 360 35 22 50
> Guerickestr. 25, 80805 München, Germany
>
>
>
>
Bernhard Schätz, fortiss GmbH, email: schaetz@xxxxxxxxxxx
Tel. +49 (0)89 360 35 22 27 Fax. +49 (0)89 360 35 22 50
Guerickestr. 25, 80805 München, Germany
Other related posts:
