seventh framework programme information and … · the participation to events, workshops,...

SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES

Project: Accessibility Assessment Simulation Environment for New

Applications Design and Development (ACCESSIBLE, Grant Agreement No. 224145)

Deliverable number and title: D 8.1a - Dissemination plans and materials

Lead beneficiary: MCA

WP. no, title and activity type

WP8 – Dissemination and Exploitation (RTD)

Contributing Task (s) T8.1 Dissemination Material & Publication Policy

Dissemination level

PU - Public

Delivery date April 2009

Status Final Draft

File name and size

“ACCESSIBLE-MCA-WP8-D8.1a-FD-03-2009.doc”, 3838 Kb

ACCESSIBLE Deliverable D8.1a -PU- Grant Agreement No. 224145

(Final Draft) -2- MCA


Authors List Leading Author (Editor)

Surname Initials Beneficiary Name (Short Name

Contact email

Van Isacker KVI MCA [email protected]

Co-authors (In alphabetic order)

# Surname Initials Beneficiary Name (Short Name

Contact email

1 Bratanova DB MCA [email protected]

2 Goranova-Valkova MGV MCA [email protected]

3 Lazarov AL MCA [email protected]

Peer Reviewers List # Surname Initials Contact email

1 BIANCHI S [email protected]

2 Widlroither HW [email protected]



Executive Summary

The first version of this Deliverable (revised versions are due in Month 24 and 30) aims to present the overall dissemination policy that will be applied in the project, the different roles of the Consortium Partners in this, and how it will be monitored and evaluated regarding its effectiveness. For this first version, the focus has been on understanding the specific target groups the projects aims at, and how they will be reached. The Deliverable also provides an analysis of the ACCESSIBLE Consortium to better apprehend the role of each Consortium Partner (research centres, enterprises industrial players and SMEs-, and end-user organisations) in the dissemination activities. More specifically, it depicts the relation of the ACCESSIBLE Partnership to its stakeholders. The Deliverable then proceeds with pinpointing the various communication modes that will be used for the project's dissemination activities, such as publications, press, online presence, TV, (Commercial) Events and conferences attendance, workshops and user forums. Finally, the Deliverable provides the evaluation methodology that will be applied to assess the dissemination (quantitatively and qualitatively).



Table of contents

Authors List ...................................................................................................................3 Peer Reviewers List .......................................................................................................3 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................5 Table of contents............................................................................................................7 List of figures.................................................................................................................9 List of tables.................................................................................................................11 List of abbreviations and acronyms .............................................................................13 1 Introduction...............................................................................................................15 2 Dissemination policy ................................................................................................17

2.1 Outline................................................................................................................17 2.2 Exploitation supported by dissemination...........................................................17 2.3 Partner groupings ...............................................................................................18

2.3.1 Research centres..........................................................................................18 2.3.2 Software sector............................................................................................18 2.3.3 End-users organisations ..............................................................................18

2.4 Stakeholders.......................................................................................................19 3 Dissemination instruments........................................................................................22

3.1 Project graphical look and feel ..........................................................................22 3.1.1 Logo ............................................................................................................22

3.2 Project presentation............................................................................................22 3.3 Leaflet and posters .............................................................................................22

3.3.1 Leaflet .........................................................................................................22 3.3.2 Poster...........................................................................................................23

3.4 6-monthly newsletters........................................................................................24 3.5 Video..................................................................................................................25 3.6 Press release .......................................................................................................26 3.7 Website ..............................................................................................................26

3.7.1 Statistics ......................................................................................................27 3.7.2 Quality criteria ............................................................................................27 3.7.3 References from other websites ..................................................................29

3.8 Attendance to events ..........................................................................................33 3.8.1 Dissemination event lists ............................................................................33 3.8.2 Events organisation.....................................................................................33

3.9 Linkage with relevant projects...........................................................................33 3.10 Linkage with standardisation bodies................................................................34 3.11 Papers...............................................................................................................34

4 Quality criteria ..........................................................................................................37 4.1 Overall dissemination evaluation.......................................................................37 4.2 Overall dissemination quality criteria................................................................38

Conclusions..................................................................................................................39 Appendix 1: Form for presentation in Conferences..............................................41 Appendix 2: Form for participation to Events, Workshops, Interviews, etc. .......45 Appendix 3: Form for presentation in Exhibitions ...............................................49 Appendix 4: Form for publication in Magazines..................................................53



List of figures

Figure 1: ACCESSIBLE logo......................................................................................22

Figure 7: ACCESSIBLE website in Google (04 January 2009)..................................30 Figure 8: ACCESSIBLE website in MSN (24 February 2009)...................................30

Figure 2: ACCESSIBLE leaflet 1st draft (front) ..........................................................23 Figure 3: ACCESSIBLE leaflet 1st draft (back) ..........................................................23 Figure 4: ACCESSIBLE poster 1st draft......................................................................24

: ACCESSIBLE 1st newsletter.......................................................................25Figure 5Figure 6: Screenshot of the website .............................................................................26

Figure 9: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the ÆGIS project website (04 January 2009) ........................................................................................................31 Figure 10: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the Marie Curie Association organisation website in English and Bulgarian (04 January 2009) - http://www.marie-curie-bg.org/projects_more.php?id=190_0_8_0_M.......................31 Figure 11: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the CERTH/ITI organisation website in English (08 January 2009) - http://www.iti.gr/db.php/en/projects/ACCESSIBLE.html ..........................................31 Figure 12: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the SOFTECO organisation website in English (08 January 2009) - http://www.softeco.it/softeco/en/Accessible1.html .....................................................32 Figure 13: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the FFCUL organisation website in English (08 January 2009) - http://hcim.di.fc.ul.pt/wiki/ACCESSIBLE ...32 Figure 14: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the NETSCOUTS organisation website in English and German (09 January 2009) - http://www.netscoutsggmbh.de/new/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30%3Aaccessible &catid=15%3Aeu-projekte&Itemid=60&lang=de ......................................................32 Figure 15: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the Sun Microsystems organisation website in English and Czech (24 February 2009) - http://cz.sun.com/euprojekty/accessible_cz.html.........................................................33



List of tables

Table 1: ACCESSIBLE end-user group ......................................................................19 Table 2: ACCESSIBLE ICT providers........................................................................20 Table 3: ACCESSIBLE service providers...................................................................20 Table 4: ACCESSIBLE resellers .................................................................................20 Table 5: ACCESSIBLE research centres.....................................................................20 Table 6: ACCESSIBLE public bodies/government.....................................................21 Table 7: ACCESSIBLE standardisation bodies...........................................................21 Table 8: ACCESSIBLE partner groupings and targeted stakeholders for dissemination ......................................................................................................................................21 Table 9: Quality criteria for internal assessment of the project web site.....................29 Table 10: Table for overall dissemination evaluation..................................................38 Table 11: Dissemination quantitative indicators..........................................................38



List of abbreviations and acronyms

DoW Description of Work PC Project Coordinator QM Quality Manager



1 Introduction To ensure that ACCESSIBLE project dissemination is undertaken in an efficient and effective manner, “WP8 Dissemination and exploitation” has 3 dedicated tasks: T8.1 Dissemination Material & Publication Policy (led by MCA), T8.2 Project Web Site (led by USTUTT), and T8.3 Project Events Organisation (led by CERTH/HIT).

While this deliverable focuses mainly on T8.1, it should not be seen loose from the other tasks. Therefore, T8.2 and T8.3 will also be addressed in more detail in this deliverable. Doing so, D8.1a lays out the framework for a consistent and homogeneous dissemination strategy throughout the entire project duration, identifying the various tools that will be used, and pinpointing the responsibilities of all partners (almost all partners have person/months in WP8).

In the first chapter, we outline the overall dissemination policy that is applied in ACCESSIBLE, defining the specific responsibilities of the various partner groupings (research centres, software companies -SMEs-, end-users organisations), while also identifying the stakeholders to be targeted by the dissemination activities.

The following chapter focuses on the various tools that are available to undertake the dissemination, and describes each of them in details: the project graphical look and feel as is being used in all communication (logo, colour scheme), the project presentation, the leaflet and posters, the 6-monthly newsletters, the project video, the press releases, the attendance to events, the linkage with relevant projects, the contribution to standardisation bodies, and the submission of papers to relevant events. Special attention is paid to the website, since this has been online from the very start of the project, and has been used increasingly to pass the status of the project towards the targeted stakeholders.

The final chapter focuses on the quality criteria that will be applied to assess whether the dissemination activities have been successful, or need improvement. This is done for the overall dissemination, but especially for the paper submissions and the project website.

The appendices provide the tools for reporting on dissemination, using specific form templates. These include the forms for the attendance and presentation in conferences, the participation to events, workshops, interviews, etc., the presentation in exhibitions, and the form for publication in journal and magazines. These dissemination reporting forms were originally included in D1.1 – Project Management, Quality Assessment Plan (Appendix 3).



2 Dissemination policy

2.1 Outline ACCESSIBLE’s dissemination policy consists of providing third parties outside the partnership with information relevant to the project, to increase interest from stakeholders and support also the exploitability of the ACCESSIBLE tools (see also task T8.6 “Exploitation Plan”). The dissemination will hereby ensure that any information provided is not in contradiction with the relevant dissemination level (Public, Restricted to other programme participants -including the Commission Services-, Restricted to a group specified by the consortium -including the Commission Services-, and Confidential, thus only for members of the consortium including the Commission Services- as set forward in the DoW.

The overall dissemination policy is being overseen by Marie Curie Association (MCA) in the context of task T8.1 “Dissemination Material & Publication Policy”.

The dissemination policy is of a centralised nature, whereby MCA as lead partner is setting out the general framework, and all partners will have access to a variety of tools (such as leaflets, posters, event calendars, newsletter, etc.) to undertake dissemination activities.

For every partner, also contacts with various stakeholders have been pinpointed (see Section 2.4). The partners will approach them with all means made available for dissemination purposes in the context of WP8, and at a later stage also for exploitation purposes.

For every dissemination activity that refers to ACCESSIBLE, the following standard message will be added in the communication: “This project was made possible by the financial contribution of the European Commission in the context of the ACCESSIBLE project (www.accessible-project.eu - Accessibility Assessment Simulation Environment for New Applications Design and Development)."

2.2 Exploitation supported by dissemination This Deliverable, and especially its updated versions in Month 24 and 36, is important in ensuring the sustainability of the project results, allowing all partners (especially the commercial ones) to capitalise on the investments made. The exploitability of the ACCESSIBLE services as defined in T8.4 Market Analysis & Business Plan, and T8.6 Exploitation Plan must go hand in hand with an adequate dissemination policy supported via WP8. This will become more obvious closer to the completion of the ACCESSIBLE services and outcomes. Especially, the various stakeholders will have to be “convinced” of the usability of ACCESSIBLE services. This requires a clear outline of the dissemination tactics that will be applied by the consortium, and more importantly, they will have to support existing or new exploitation activities of the consortium partners. This will be crucial during but especially beyond the project duration. The next version of this Deliverable will therefore contain: • Detailed overview of stakeholders per project partner, including name of the

organisations, their location, the contact person, how they will be reached



(press, f2f, conference, exhibition, workshop, etc.), and what dissemination tools that will be used (leaflet, press article, demo, etc.).

Once ACCESSIBLE’s Business Plan has been drafted, also the dissemination approach for every involved stakeholder will be outlined. This will be incorporated in the updated version in Month 36. That version of this Deliverable will therefore contain: • Different exploitation models, and its impact on dissemination towards the

involved stakeholders. • Attendance to events to demonstrate ACCESSIBLE services. • Organisation of (commercial) workshops.

2.3 Partner groupings The partners can be grouped as following:

2.3.1 Research centres Partners • Centre for Research and Technology Hellas / Informatics and Telematics

Institute • Centre for Research and Technology Hellas / Hellenic Institute of • Transport • Foundation for Research and Technology Hellas, Institute of Computer

Science • University of Stuttgart, Institute for Human Factors and Technology

Management • Fundação da Faculdade de Ciências da Universidade de Lisboa • CONNCEPT SWISS

Role in dissemination • Undertake and maintain contact with academic and research world • Contribute to standardisation bodies • Prepare and submit relevant research oriented papers • Participate in relevant events

2.3.2 Software sector Partners • Sun Microsystems • Alcatel-Lucent Deutschland AG • Softeco Sismat SpA • SOLINET GmbH

Role in dissemination • Undertake and maintain contact with industry • Contribute to standardisation bodies • Prepare and submit relevant industry oriented papers • Participate in relevant events

2.3.3 End-users organisations Partners • Netscouts GmbH



• Marie Curie Association Role in dissemination • Undertake and maintain contact with end-user groups • Prepare and submit end-user oriented papers • Participate in relevant end-user events

2.4 Stakeholders ACCESSIBLE user and stakeholder groups are summarized below:

Elderly Individuals

End-user groups

(umbrella) Organisations

People with disabilities

Individuals

(umbrella) Organisations

Teachers Tutors Formal

Informal

Trainers Formal

Informal

Family members

Table 1: ACCESSIBLE end-user group

Industrial players

(AT) designers

ICT providers

(AT) developers

SMEs (AT) designers

Mainstream software developers



(AT) developers

Mainstream software developers

Individuals OS developers

Web application developers

Desktop developers

Mobile application developers

AT experts

Mainstream software experts

Accessibility assessors Table 2: ACCESSIBLE ICT providers

Private Mobile service providers

Service providers

Web service providers

Support services Table 3: ACCESSIBLE service providers

Training institutions

Support services

Public Training institutions

Resellers

Software resellers Resellers AT resellers

Table 4: ACCESSIBLE resellers

Research centers

AT research Table 5: ACCESSIBLE research centres

Public bodies/government

Local authorities

Public procurement agencies

AT research National authorities

Ministry of labour and education

National social security

Disability agencies



Policy makers

Universities

Centres of VET1

Table 6: ACCESSIBLE public bodies/government

Standardisation bodies

National standardisation bodies

European standardisation bodies2

International standardisation bodies Table 7: ACCESSIBLE standardisation bodies

Based on the partner groupings, and a simplified stakeholders overview, following dissemination linkage can be made:

Research centres Software/TELCO sector

End-user organisation

End-user groups X

ICT providers X

Service providers X X

Resellers X

Research centers X

Public bodies/government

X X X

Standardisation bodies

X X

Table 8: ACCESSIBLE partner groupings and targeted stakeholders for dissemination

This will be further separately detailed for every partner in their reporting on dissemination activities in the next version of the dissemination plan, which will have to clearly identify what specific stakeholders have been and are being targeted, how and when.

1 Vocational Education and Training 2 E.g. CEN/CENELEC Guide 6 “Guidelines for standards developers to address the needs of older persons and people with disabilities when developing standards.”



3 Dissemination instruments

3.1 Project graphical look and feel

3.1.1Logo The project logo was conceived at the very beginning of the project and depicts in an attractive manner on the one hand through the bottom title the technological aspects of the project (applications, design, development), while the project acronym itself is built out of clear distinguishable characters. The characters in orange depict people with mobility, vision and hearing impairments.

Figure 1: ACCESSIBLE logo

This logo is distinctively used on the project website, leaflet and poster and will also be used accordingly on all other dissemination material which will be produced in the context of the project.

3.2 Project presentation The project presentation (D8.1c) was delivered in Month 3 (November 2008). It provides an overview of the consortium, specific project data (EC contribution, etc.), the project objectives, the technical approach to be applied (i.e. architecture and modules, pilot applications and specific ACCESSIBLE scenarios), and finally the expected impact.

This is a public deliverable and has been made available for download on the project’s website.

3.3 Leaflet and posters

3.3.1 Leaflet A leaflet is being designed, following the look and feel of the logo. Approximately 2000 leaflets will be produced in total, spread over 3 batches (versions): M6, 24, 36. The 1st one will present the project in general, the 2nd one will focus on the tools developed by the project, and the last one will focus on the findings from the pilots, and will also demonstrate the tools. The predominant colours are grey, orange and blue, as is also the case in the logo. A similar approach has also been applied for the project’s poster (see 3.3.2).



Figure 2: ACCESSIBLE leaflet 1st draft (front)

Figure 3: ACCESSIBLE leaflet 1st draft (back)

Apart from providing an overview of the project consortium, and some details on the project duration, the leaflet mainly focuses on the project concept and aims, offering an overview of the overall architecture and modules. Also the pilot applications are clarified, including also the target groups identified by the project.

Having both end-user oriented and technical content, the leaflet will appeal to all target groups identified by the project.

The leaflet will be distributed by the project partners to their identified stakeholders, while the leaflet will also be disseminated at relevant events. An electronic version of this leaflet will also be made available for download on the project website, and will be provided in an accessible format (annotated PDF).

3.3.2 Poster The poster has the same look and feel as the leaflet, and will follow a similar production cycle as the leaflets (3 versions at different intervals). Around 300 posters will be created in total.



Figure 4: ACCESSIBLE poster 1st draft

The poster provides an overview of the project mission and main goals, and contains a short overview of the application areas as will be evaluated in the pilots.

The poster will be used at events to which partners participate. An electronic version will also be made available for download on the project website. This will be accessible by all.

3.4 6-monthly newsletters A 6-monthly newsletter was prepared for Month 6 (February 2009), and will also be made available for download on the project website, both as webpage, and as accessible PDF. The newsletter follows a similar look and feel like that of the leaflet and poster.



Figure 5: ACCESSIBLE 1st newsletter

The first newsletter focuses on presenting the project, and features also a contact form, so that interested parties can contact the project to stay informed.

3.5 Video In the course of the project, short videos (2-3 minutes long) that demonstrate the use and advantages of the system will be created. They will be made available in a streaming format to the general public through the project’s website by month 35 (July-August 2011).

The videos will address the following areas: • Mobile applications

o The concept will be provided by SUN. • Web services assessment

o The concept will be provided by CERTH/ITI. • Web application assessment

o The concept will be provided by FORTH.



• Description language assessment o The concept will be provided by CERTH/ITI.

These videos will be made available on DVD, while they will also be streamed through the project website using also video dissemination search engines such as the ones provided by YouTube and Google Video.

3.6 Press release In the course of the project, a number of press releases will take place. These will be generated in cooperation with CERTH/ITI, SUN CZ and MCA, and will be provided also for download on the website.

3.7 Website The entire website setup and structure has been fully covered in D8.1b: “Project web site” (website and written deliverable). We will here shortly describe some core aspects of the website with respect to the monitoring of the effectiveness and efficiency of the website usage as dissemination tool.

The ACCESSIBLE website was available by the end of Month 1 and is reachable via the domains www.accessible-eu.org (held by USTUTT) and www.accessibleproject.eu (held by CERTH/ITI). The addresses were selected in order to emphasize the project as a European project.

Figure 6: Screenshot of the website



The website is maintained on a continuous basis by USTUTT and follows a clear publication policy whereby all information is collected by MCA from the partners and is then uploaded by USTUTT to the website.

3.7.1 Statistics On a monthly basis, statistics are collected from the website by USTUTT and will be used as indicators regarding the number of visitors, the popularity of the pages, etc. These are generated, using the Webalizer Version 2.01 tool. USTUTT in cooperation with MCA is monitoring these data on a monthly basis.

3.7.2 Quality criteria

Just like in the ÆGIS3 project, specific quality criteria4 will be applied to assess the effectiveness of the project website, apart from the statistics that the project will collect from the server side (see 3.7.1). These criteria will be assessed by the WP8 members on an annual basis, and will enable the assessment of the efficiency of the website dissemination strategy. The outcome will be reported in the future versions of this Deliverable.

The aforementioned quality criteria are depicted in the following table.

Quality criteria

Content wise

Evaluation

Not sufficient Sufficient Excellent

Accuracy:

• Error-free information

• Current information, updated frequently and with recent "last" update

• Objective, balanced presentation of information

• Bias-free viewpoints and images

• Correct use of grammar, spelling, and sentence structure

• Primary outlink (link that takes you to an additional site) content is relevant, authentic, and appropriate

3 www.aegis-project.eu 4 Based on http://www.evalutech.sreb.org/criteria/web.asp



Quality criteria

• Authority (project has the competences to make certain valid statements)

Evaluation


• Contact information for author(s) (authors of articles should be easily identifiable with contact details – albeit through form of website)

Appropriateness:

• Concepts and vocabulary relevant to the end-users' abilities

• Interaction compatible with the physical and intellectual maturity of intended audience

Scope:

• Information of sufficient scope to adequately cover the topic for the intended audience

• Logical progression of topics within original site (site being evaluated) and primary outlinks

• Information offered not easily available in other sources

Technical Aspects

Navigation:

• Ready access to site; site not overloaded

• Images load within reasonable timeframe

• Intuitive icons, menus, and directional symbols that foster independent use

• Inlinks (links that take you to locations within the original site) that allow easy navigation throughout the site

• Standard multimedia formats

• Logical options for printing/downloading all or selected text and graphics



Quality criteria

Presentation:

Evaluation


• Site follows good graphic design principles

• Screen displays uncluttered and concise

• Captions, labels, or legends for all visuals

• Legible text and print size appropriate for the intended audience

• Graphics and art functional, not merely decorative

• Information presented through text, motion, still images, and sound

• Information presented in a manner to stimulate imagination and curiosity

Table 9: Quality criteria for internal assessment of the project web site

3.7.3 References from other websites The project website has been submitted to a number of search engines, and its “findability” will be increased in the next few months through the increased number of references to the project website (as was e.g. already also done from the ÆGIS project website).

Search engines The project website ranked second in Google when searching on “Accessible project”.



Figure 7: ACCESSIBLE website in Google (04 January 2009)

When searching on “Accessible project” in MSN, the project website ranked third.

Figure 8: ACCESSIBLE website in MSN (24 February 2009)

References on partner websites The project website has already been referenced on a number of partner websites, and this will be further increased, thus also strengthening the search engine ranking.



Figure 9: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the ÆGIS project website (04 January 2009)

Figure 10: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the Marie Curie Association organisation website in English and Bulgarian (04 January 2009) - http://www.marie-curie

bg.org/projects_more.php?id=190_0_8_0_M

Figure 11: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the CERTH/ITI organisation website in English (08 January 2009) - http://www.iti.gr/db.php/en/projects/ACCESSIBLE.html



Figure 12: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the SOFTECO organisation website in English (08 January 2009) - http://www.softeco.it/softeco/en/Accessible1.html

Figure 13: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the FFCUL organisation website in English (08 January 2009) - http://hcim.di.fc.ul.pt/wiki/ACCESSIBLE

Figure 14: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the NETSCOUTS organisation website in English and German (09 January 2009) - http://www.netscouts

ggmbh.de/new/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=30%3Aaccessible&catid=15% 3Aeu-projekte&Itemid=60&lang=de



Figure 15: Reference to ACCESSIBLE project website on the Sun Microsystems organisation website in English and Czech (24 February 2009) -

http://cz.sun.com/euprojekty/accessible_cz.html

3.8 Attendance to events

3.8.1Dissemination event lists On a monthly basis, an events calendar is provided to all partners, containing updated details on forthcoming events that are of interest to the project. Partners can use these events to submit relevant papers, prepare for participations in events, supported with demos, as well as can identify potential collaborations and synergies (such as relevant workshops, discussion forums).

Participation in events by partners must be reported via the reporting forms that can be found in the appendices (Appendix 1: Form for presentation in Conferences; Appendix 2: Form for participation to Events, Workshops, Interviews, etc.; Appendix 3: Form for presentation in Exhibitions)

3.8.2 Events organisation A European Workshop on accessibility assessment and simulation technologies will be organized by the Consortium in Month 24 in a central European location. The objective of this workshop is to widely disseminate the ACCESSIBLE concept and diffuse preliminary results from workpackages and get feedback from the experts' community for the actual implementation in the development phase WPs that include the development of the system’s algorithms, databases and hardware infrastructure. Also, relevant smaller workshops will be organized after the Month 24 to disseminate the results of the development phase of the project. More information about this will be provided in the next version of this deliverable.

3.9 Linkage with relevant projects During the project duration, contacts will be made with relevant projects that are also working in similar areas, especially those addressing accessibility of software interfaces. In this respect, contacts will be shared also with the dissemination activities of the ÆGIS project (there are a number of common partners).



3.10 Linkage with standardisation bodies Many of the project partners have direct linkages to standardisation bodies, This will be intensified in the course of the project. Some of the potential standardisation bodies and corresponding workgroups include (not an exhaustive list): • W3C Authoring Tool Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (AUWG,

http://www.w3.org/WAI/AU/): the project can contribute with input on how to tailor development environments to produce accessible content and provide accessible user interfaces for the creation of accessible applications (e.g., Web sites);

• W3C Education & Outreach Working Group (EOWG, http://www.w3.org/WAI/EO/): results from the ACCESSIBLE project can be used as additional input for EOWG, regarding the outcomes from the pilot deployment and tests defined in the project;

• W3C Evaluation and Repair Tools Working Group (ERT WG, http://www.w3.org/WAI/ER/): ACCESSIBLE will be producing EARL-based reports for accessibility evaluations. Since the ERT working group is responsible for the definition of the EARL standard, ACCESSIBLE can provide feedback on the completeness and adequacy of EARL in different application settings;

• W3C Research and Development Interest Group (RDIG, http://www.w3.org/WAI/RD/): since one of the main goals of ACCESSIBLE is to go beyond the state-of-the-art in accessibility assessment in different application scenarios, its research results can be used as additional input to this group;

• W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines Working Group (WCAG WG, http://www.w3.org/WAI/GL/): one of the application scenarios of ACCESSIBLE concerns the evaluation of Web sites and Web applications with WCAG 1.0 and 2.0. Since WCAG WG is responsible for the definition of these standards, ACCESSIBLE can provide implementation reports to the working group, e.g. the application of these standards to personalised accessibility assessment.

3.11 Papers Based on the events calendar that is sent to all consortium members on a monthly basis, partners have already been informed about all relevant events, thus they can also identify those events where they would like to participate. Currently the project, through its research-oriented partners (CERTH and FFCUL), has already published or accepted for publication the following scientific papers in peer-reviewed scientific conferences and books: • Konstantinos Votis, Rui Lopes, Dimitrios Tzovaras, Luís Carriço and Spiridon

Likothanassis, A Semantic Accessibility Assessment Environment for Design and Development for the Web, HCI International 2009 (HCII 2009), San Diego, California, USA, 19-24 July 2009,

• Rui Lopes, Konstantinos Votis, Luís Carriço, Spiridon Likothanassis and Dimitrios Tzovaras, Towards the Universal Semantic Assessment of Accessibility, 24th Annual ACM Symposium on Applied Computing (SAC), Waikiki Beach, Honolulu, Hawaii, USA, 8-12 March 2009,

• Rui Lopes, Konstantinos Votis, Luís Carriço, Spiridon Likothanassis and Dimitrios Tzovaras, A Service Oriented Ontological Framework for the



Semantic Validation of Web Accessibility, Handbook of Research on Social Dimensions of Semantic Technologies, IGI Global, 2009,

The following scientific papers are currently pending review (as of 25 February/2009) on scientific conferences: • Rui Lopes, Konstantinos Votis, Luís Carriço, Spiridon Likothanassis and

Dimitrios Tzovaras. Accessible to Whom? The Semantics of Personalised Web Accessibility Assessment. Submitted for the 6th ACM International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web Accessibility, ACM W4A, Madrid, Spain, 20-21 April 2009.

Forthcoming scientific publications will continue to address all advancements on the state-of-the-art produced in the context of the ACCESSIBLE project. The following scientific conferences are envisioned (not an exhaustive list): • ACM ASSETS (SIGACCESS Conference on Computers and Accessibility) • ACM W4A (International Cross-Disciplinary Conference on Web

Accessibility) • ACM CHI (Human Factors in Computing Systems) • HCII (International Conference on Human-Computer Interaction)

As mentioned also in “D 1.1 – Project Management, Quality Assessment Plan”, the following are considered dissemination events: • Publications in Scientific, Technical or Commercial Journals; • Presentations in Conferences; • Exhibition stands and demos; • Participation in non-project workshops, forums and/or events.

To avoid any double submissions or participations, a procedure for publications has been drafted as following (as stated in D1.1 “Project Management, Quality Assessment Plan”):

• Completion of appropriate form from Appendix 4: Form for publication in Magazines and submission of it to the whole Consortium through e-mail through the Project Management Portal.

• Written acceptance should be sent to the requesting Participant within 5 working days from receipt from both the Project coordinator (PC) and the Quality Manager (QM). Else, it is supposed to be positive.

• The draft paper is then circulated to all project participants before submission. All participants may object to the publication of confidential data or to non-inclusion of their name, if their work is also included. Comments are to be sent to the publishing Partner with copies to the PC and the QM. Then the author should restructure the draft paper accordingly. In case of conflict, it is the task of the PC and the QM together to take the final decision.

• After paper acceptance, the revised relevant Form from Appendix 4: Form for publication in Magazines will be sent to the PC and the QM,

together with a copy of the final paper. • After the dissemination event takes place, a final version of the relevant Form

from Appendix 4: Form for publication in Magazines will be sent again to the PC and the QM for their archives.



The participation in exhibitions through a stand and the presentation of demos of the project results also require prior agreement of the whole project Consortium.

The above rules will be applied and checked by the QM in order to: • Avoid repetition of publication of the same work • Avoid publication of restrictive and/or commercial in confidence data • Avoid misunderstandings between Participants and publication of one’s work

without proper referencing • Secure optimum use of dissemination resources of the project • Guarantee proper archiving of all dissemination material



4 Quality criteria To assess the dissemination activities and undertake a regular evaluation, following quality criteria5 will be applied. They are also applied in the context of the ÆGIS project as reported in ÆGIS “D5.3.1a Dissemination Plan”.

4.1 Overall dissemination evaluation

All partners will be requested to complete a yearly overall dissemination evaluation. The consolidated results will be made available to the entire consortium, and will identify the areas that need to be improved. The results will be reported on in the updated dissemination plan, scheduled for Month 24, and 36.

Quality criteria

Evaluation

Not efficient Moderate Excellent

The target groups are addressed by means of proper communication channels and tools (i.e. addressing research community via papers at workshops and conferences, etc.)

The number of dissemination activities towards the research community (i.e. the number of papers in journals, workshop and conference proceedings etc.) is sufficient (see criteria set forward).

The number of dissemination activities towards user communities (i.e. number of presentations for policy makers etc.) is sufficient.

The number of dissemination activities towards the general public is sufficient.

The number of dissemination activities towards the private sector, SMEs, national and international associations of SMEs, etc. is sufficient.

The number of dissemination activities towards policy makers is sufficient.

The web presence of the project (including language versions of the project web site) is of good quality, providing useful content to all the identified target groups (measured by the number of visitors and feedback provided by them).

The press releases are issued in national languages (minimum 2 press releases per reporting period)

5 Based on http://www.evalutech.sreb.org/criteria/web.asp



Evaluation

Quality criteria

Not efficient Moderate Excellent

Dissemination activities are carried out timely, in accordance with the schedule of principal project outcomes.

The consortium communicates and interacts with relevant standard organisations

Table 10: Table for overall dissemination evaluation

4.2 Overall dissemination quality criteria

Apart from providing an overview of what the project is undertaking or plans to do so, an assessment must be carried out to quantify the effect of the undertaken dissemination. The project's overall dissemination activities will be subject to a set of quality criteria. These will allow highlighting any problems that need to be addressed. Following success criteria will be used as minimum requirements for a successful dissemination policy.

Year 1

Min. 2

Year 2

Min. 4

Year 3

Min. 6Presentations at conferences

Publications in scientific journals

- Min. 4 Min. 8

European user forum -

-

Min. 30 external participants

Min. 30 external expert participants

-

-European workshop

National workshops - - Min. 15 external expert participants

Monthly web visits More than 100 on average More than 200 on average More than 350 on average

Project video - -Videos will be shown on at least 2 national TV channels

Table 11: Dissemination quantitative indicators



Conclusions

The dissemination strategy as outlined in this dissemination plan is a starting point from which WP8: “Dissemination and Exploitation” will organise its activities. Based upon the evaluation criteria as brought forward in this Deliverable, WP8 Partners will be able to fine-tune the dissemination activities, and where needed improve them.

The next versions of this Deliverable will define the outcome of the evaluations that will have been undertaken by then (this is applicable for the version anticipated after the end of the first year; Month 24), as well as will define in more detail the dissemination material that will have been produced and how they will support the exploitation. The updated deliverables will also report on all dissemination activities that will have been undertaken or planned by then (papers submission, events participations and organisation, etc.).



Appendix 1: Form for presentation in Conferences SEVENTH FRAMEWORK PROGRAMME

INFORMATION AND COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGIES

Project: Accessibility Assessment Simulation Environment for New


Form for presentation in Conferences: (Name of Conference and abbreviation)

Corresponding (name, organisation, email) Person Summary (no more than 5 lines)

Related WP(s) (main WP of relevance, followed by other relevant WPs)

Submission date (if applicable, in form dd mm yyyy)

Presentation date month yyyy

Status (“Presented”, “Accepted” or “Pending until mm/dd/yyyy”)

File ID (Identify the file(s) constituting the presented work)



1. Title

2. Type ;Oral presentation ;Paper �Poster �Tutorial �Other: (please specify)

3. Authors List Leading Speaker (Main Author)

Surname Initials Institution (Short Name) Contact email

Co-authors (In alphabetic order) # Surname Initials Institution (Short Name) Contact email 1 2 3

(add lines as appropriate) 4. Abstract

5. Other info about the presentation Time & Number of pages or words

(e.g., “20mins, 12 pages, single-space” or “15mins, ~5000 words”)

Language ~English {Other: (please specify)

Full reference, if available

6. Conference information Name of Conference

(Full title, e.g., Human-Computer Interaction International Conference 2009)

Acronym (e.g., HCII2009)

Date and Location (e.g., 22-29 July 2009, San Diego, USA)



Conference URL (e.g., http://www.hcii2009.org/)

Type of submission {Regular submission ~Invited

Type ~Scientific {Industrial {Informative {Other: (please specify)

Range {International ~Europe {America {National: (please specify)

Review policy

~Abstract review

{Extended Abstract review

{Full-paper review

{Other: (please specify)

Conference Proceedings

~Hardcopy ~Hardcopy and CD

{CD only {Other: (please specify)

Speaker’s cost (e.g., none)

Participants’ cost (e.g., yes, Registration fees: $595-745)

7. Special Requests / Comments (prior the Conference)

(Special requests to be communicated to the Project Coordinator, Technical Coordinator or Quality Manager prior the conference).

8. Post Reporting (after the Conference)(Report on participants’ feedback after the conference to be communicated to the Project Coordinator, Technical Coordinator or Quality Manager).



Appendix 2: Form for participation to Events, Workshops, Interviews, etc.


Project Accessibility Assessment Simulation Environment for New


Form for participation to Events, Workshops, Interviews, etc. (Name of Event or Interviewer)

Leading Person (name, organisation, email)

Summary (no more than 5 lines)

Date dd month yyyy

Status (“Finished”, “Agreed” or “Pending until mm/dd/yyyy”)

File ID (Identify any supportive / accompanying file(s))



1. Theme (Explain here the topic of the event)

2. Type �Presentation �Workshop �Panel �Press documentary

�Press conference ;Press interview �Other: (please specify)

3. Participants ListLeading person


Co-participants (In alphabetic order) # Surname Initials Institution (Short Name) Contact email 1 2 3

(add lines as appropriate) 4. Short Description

(please describe the objectives and plan)

5. Other info about the event / interview Time (e.g., “half-day”)


Supportive material used

(e.g., Project video, Posters, Leaflets, Newsletters etc.)

6. Event / Interview information Name of Event / Interviewer (Full name)

Acronym (if applicable)

Date and (e.g., 12-16 June 2009, City, Country)



Location Estimated participation / audience

(e.g., around 5.000 people)

Type of audience ;Authorities �Users �Manufacturers �Other: (please specify)


Participation cost (e.g., yes, Presenter / Interviewee fees: €600)

7. Special Requests / Comment (prior the event)

(Special requests to be communicated to the Project Coordinator, Technical Coordinator or Quality Manager prior the event).

8. Post Reporting (after the event)(Report on visitors’ feedback after the event to be communicated to the Project Coordinator, Technical Coordinator or Quality Manager).



Appendix 3: Form for presentation in Exhibitions




Form for presentation in Exhibitions (Name of Exhibition and abbreviation)

Leading Person (name, organisation, email)

Summary (no more than 5 lines)

Exhibition date month yyyy

Status (“Finished”, “Agreed” or “Pending until mm/dd/yyyy”)

File ID (Identify any supportive / accompanying file(s))



1. Sign-Board (Please type here the overhead label to be used at the stand)

2. Type 1. ;Project Stand �Partner Stand �Other: (please specify)

2. ;Multimedia presentation �Interactive demo(s) �Other: (please specify)

3. Exhibitors List Leading person


Co-exhibitors (In alphabetic order) # Surname Initials Institution (Short Name) Contact email 1 2 3

(add lines as appropriate) 4. Short Description

5. Other info about the stand/demo Time (e.g., “half-day”)

Space (size in m2)


Supportive material used

(e.g., Project video, Posters, Leaflets, Newsletters etc.)

6. Exhibition information Name of Exhibition (Full title, e.g., Autonomia Expo 2009)



Acronym (e.g., Autonomia2009)

Date and Location (e.g., 12-16 June 2009, Athens, Greece)

Conference URL (e.g., http://www.autonomiaexpo.org/)

Estimated participation (e.g., around 5.000 visitors)

Type ~Scientific {Industrial {Informative {Other: (please specify)


Exhibitors’ cost (e.g., yes, Exhibitor fees: €600)

Participants’ cost (e.g., none)

7. Special Requests / Comment (prior the Exhibition)

(Special requests to be communicated to the Project Coordinator, Technical Coordinator or Quality Manager prior the exhibition).

8. Post Reporting (after the Exhibition)(Report on visitors’ feedback after the exhibition to be communicated to the Project Coordinator, Technical Coordinator or Quality Manager).



Appendix 4: Form for publication in Magazines




Form for publication in Magazines (Name of Magazine and abbreviation)

Corresponding (name, organisation, email) Author Summary (no more than 5 lines)

Related WP(s) (main WP of relevance, followed by other relevant WPs)

Submission date dd mm yyyy

Publication date month yyyy

Publication Status (“Published”, “Accepted” or “Pending until mm/dd/yyyy”)

File ID (Identify the file(s) constituting the article)



1. Title

2. Authors List Leading Author (Editor)


Co-authors (In alphabetic order) # Surname Initials Institution (Short Name) Contact email 1 2 3

(add lines as appropriate) 3. Abstract

4. Other info about the article Number of pages or words

(e.g., “12 pages, single-space” or “~5000 words”)

Language of paper ~English {Other: (please specify)

Full reference, if available

5. Magazine information Name of Magazine

(Full title, e.g., European Transport Research Review – On open access journal)

Acronym (e.g., ETRR)

Publisher (e.g., Springer-Verlag)



Editor (e.g., Evangelos Bekiaris)

Magazine URL (e.g., http://www.springer.com/12544)

Type ~Scientific {Professional {Special {Informational {Newspaper


General Policy {Traditional publishing model ~Open access policy

Author’s cost (e.g., none)

Readers’ cost (e.g., none)

6. Special Requests or Comments(Special requests or comments to be communicated to the Project Coordinator, Technical Coordinator or Quality Manager prior or after the publication).


seventh framework programme information and … · the participation to events, workshops,...

Documents