terms of reference - computing.surrey.ac.uk€¦ · web viewproject ref. no. le2-4002 project...

Project ref. no. LE2-4002

Project title INTERVAL

Deliverable status Public

Contractual date of delivery 31 / 05 / 96

Actual date of delivery 08 / 11 / 96

Deliverable number D0h

Deliverable title Terms of Reference

Type TR-Technical Report

Status & version Final-1.0

Number of pages 39

WP contributing to the deliverable

WP0-T06

WP / Task responsible CL Servicios Lingüísticos S.A.C/Fuencarral, 123-5ºE_28010 Madrid

Author(s) CL, E. Quillot & A. Crespel

EC Project Officer José Soler

Keywords INTERVAL contacts, INTERVAL reports and documents, contributors, task co-ordinators, Management Committee, Scientific Committee, Technical Committee, Users’ Club, Work programme, First results

Abstract (for dissemination) Definition and description of the different INTERVAL reports and documents, reporting procedures. Definition of the functions and responsibilities of the partners and institutions as the Committees or the Users’ Club.

Presentation of the Work programme and the results of the identification of user needs; existing finance and telecommunications terminology and availability; analysis of legal questions relating to the protection of terminology; guidelines for the production and quality evaluation of terminology resources; INTERVAL dissemination objectives

Interval TERMS OF REFERENCE Title page

TERMS OF REFERENCE

LE Reference LE2-4002

Origin / Author CL, E. Quillot & A. CrespelWP / Task WP0 / T06

Task Responsible CL

Distribution CEC / Partners / public

Status internal draft / circulated draft / final

Doc. validated by Contributors / Partners / UC / SC / TEC

Print date j/11/96

No pages 39

File name document.doc

Revision no 6

CL, E. Quillot & A. Crespel [ document.doc] j/11/96

Interval TERMS OF REFERENCE 3

Table of contents

1. INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................................

1.1 PURPOSE.......................................................................................................................................................

1.2 STRUCTURE...................................................................................................................................................

1.3 REVISION HISTORY........................................................................................................................................

2. CONSORTIUM MEMBERS........................................................................................................................

3. REPORTS.....................................................................................................................................................

3.1 INDIVIDUAL WEEKLY HOURLY REPORTS..........................................................................................................

3.2 BI-MONTHLY MANAGEMENT REPORTS.............................................................................................................

3.3 SEMESTRIAL PROGRESS REPORTS....................................................................................................................

3.4 EVALUATION REPORT....................................................................................................................................

3.5 PUBLIC ANNUAL REPORTS..............................................................................................................................

3.6 FINAL REPORT FOR THE FIRST PHASE.............................................................................................................

3.7 INTERVAL PUBLIC DOCUMENTS......................................................................................................................

3.8 BI-MONTHLY INTERVAL NEWSLETTER.........................................................................................................

3.9 DELIVERABLES AND OTHER INTERVAL DOCUMENTS....................................................................................

4. WP AND TASK FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES.......................................................................

4.1 THE CONTRIBUTOR........................................................................................................................................

4.2 THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR A TASK..........................................................................................................4.2.1 Management of work within a Task......................................................................................................

4.2.1.1 The Work Programme.............................................................................................................................4.2.1.2 The circulation of information................................................................................................................4.2.1.3 Working language...................................................................................................................................4.2.1.4 Management of man/days........................................................................................................................4.2.1.5 The involvement of non-contributing partners.........................................................................................

4.2.2 Administration of the calendar..............................................................................................................4.2.2.1 Task Calendar.........................................................................................................................................

4.2.3 Task Validation....................................................................................................................................4.3 THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR WP................................................................................................................

5. INTERVAL INSTITUTIONS.......................................................................................................................

5.1 THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, ‘MC’..........................................................................................................5.1.1 Functions and Responsibilities of the Management Committee.............................................................5.1.2 Chairman of the Management Committee............................................................................................5.1.3 Management Committee members.......................................................................................................5.1.4 Management Meetings.........................................................................................................................

5.1.4.1 Management Committee Meetings Programme........................................................................................5.1.4.2 WP Management Meetings Programme...................................................................................................5.1.4.3 WP Progress Meetings............................................................................................................................

5.2 CONCERTATION - CLUSTER MEETING REPRESENTATION.................................................................................

5.3 THE SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, ‘SC’.................................................................................................................


5.3.1 The SC Functions.................................................................................................................................5.3.2 The SC Meetings..................................................................................................................................5.3.3 The SC Members..................................................................................................................................

5.4 THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE, ‘TEC’.............................................................................................................5.4.1 The TEC Functions..............................................................................................................................5.4.2 The TEC Meetings...............................................................................................................................5.4.3 The TEC members...............................................................................................................................

5.5 THE USERS’ CLUB, ‘UC’...............................................................................................................................5.5.1 Users’ Club Functions..........................................................................................................................5.5.2 Users’ Club Meetings...........................................................................................................................5.5.3 Users’ Club Members...........................................................................................................................

6. INTERVAL WORK PROGRAMME..........................................................................................................

6.1 WP 0, IDENTIFICATION OF USER NEEDS, EXISTING TERMINOLOGY AND AVAILABILITY......................................

6.2 WP 1, QUALITY EVALUATION OF EXISTING TERMINOLOGIES...........................................................................

6.3 WP 2, ACQUISITION......................................................................................................................................

6.4 WP 3, CONSOLIDATION AND VALIDATION......................................................................................................

6.5 WP 4, TOOLS, COMPATIBILITY AND DATA EXCHANGE ISSUES..........................................................................

6.6 WP 5, PRODUCTION OF DEMONSTRATORS.......................................................................................................

6.7 WP 6, EXPLOITATION, DISTRIBUTION, AND DISSEMINATION............................................................................

6.8 PROJECT TIMETABLE.....................................................................................................................................

7. IDENTIFICATION OF USER NEEDS, EXISTING TERMINOLOGY AND AVAILABILITY - FIRST RESULTS....................................................................................................................................................

7.1 T01 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................................7.1.1 Purpose................................................................................................................................................7.1.2 Methodology........................................................................................................................................7.1.3 General Trends.....................................................................................................................................

7.2 T02 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................................


7.4 T04 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................................7.4.1 Copyright and contracts........................................................................................................................

7.4.1.1 Comparison of different contracts according to the country and type of legal protection........................7.4.1.2 Examination of legal texts on the subject of copyright.............................................................................7.4.1.3 Bilingual and Multilingual Dictionaries (Translation Dictionaries)........................................................



1INTRODUCTION

1.1PURPOSE

This document sets out the terms of reference for the project, its aim is to introduce the Consortium members, the various project institutions (Users’ Club, Scientific and Technical Committees) and the administrative functioning of the project. It also gives an overview of the different project workpackages and the workplan.

Additionally, the last part of this document is devoted to the initial project results and includes the T01 to T05 executive summaries. These initial results will serve as a base for the development of subsequent project tasks.

1.2STRUCTURE

Parts 3, 4 and 5 introduce the institutions and functioning of the Interval project. Part 6 includes the workplan and Part 7 includes the executive summaries of tasks T01 to T05.

1.3REVISION HISTORY

· Version written by Etienne Quillot & Alexis Crespel


2CONSORTIUM MEMBERS

Participant’s name and address Phone / Fax / E-mail

CL Servicios Lingüísticos S.A.C/Fuencarral, 12328010 Madrid - SpainWho?Norbert Kalfon, Alexis Crespel, Agnès Bourdon

Tel: 34 (1) 448 58 61Fax: 34 (1) 593 05 95

E-mail: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]@compuserve.com

CL France8, rue Rossini75009 Paris - FranceWho?Etienne Quillot

Tel: 33 (0) 1 48.01.01.20Fax: 33 (0) 1 48.01.01.21

E-mail: [email protected] [email protected]

in Lyon: Who?Valérie Schott117, rue Garibaldi69006 Lyon, France

Tel: 33 (0) 4 72.74.12.50


LCICentre d’Affaires du Bois de Jouy5, rue du Petit Robinson78350 Jouy-en-Josas Cedex - FranceWho?Erik Lebreton, Tita Kyriacopoulou

Tel: 33 (0) 1 34.58.77.77 / 33 (0) 1 34.58.77.63Fax: 33 (0) 1 34.58.77.00

E-mail: [email protected]

La Maison du Dictionnaire98, Bld du Montparnasse75014 Paris - FranceWho?Michel Feutry

Tel: 33 (1) 43.22.12.93Fax: 33 (1) 43.22.01.77Modem: 33 (1) 43 20 51 86E-mail: [email protected]

Western Systems OyVallikallionkatu 102600 Espoo -FinlandWho?Markus Rantapuu, Pekka Kähkipuro

Tel: 358 (9) 615 6600 358 400 420 973 (mobile, Markus) 358 49 468 291 (mobile, Pekka)Fax: 358 (9) 615 66400


TRADOS Benelux S.A.Av. de Tervuren 3031150 Bruxelles - BelgiumWho ?Matthias Heyn, Cornelis van der Laan

Tel: 32 (2) 771 69 60 (new number soon)Fax: 32 (2) 771 70 43 (new number soon)

E-mail: [email protected], [email protected] [email protected] [email protected]


Participant’s name and address Phone / Fax / E-mail

TRADOSHackländerstr. 1770148 Stuttgart - GermanyWho?Jochen Hummel, Iko zu Knyphausen

Tel: 49 (711) 168 77 0Fax: 49 (711) 168 77 50

E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]

TERMCATDiputació, 119-5ª08015 Barcelona - SpainWho?E. Franquesa i Bonet, Ariadna Puiggené

Tel: 34 (3) 451 47 77Fax: 34 (3) 451 64 37E-mail: [email protected] [email protected]

Union Latine131, rue du Bac75007 Paris - FranceWho?Daniel Prado, Débora Farji

Tel: 33 (0) 1 45.49.60.60Fax: 33 (0) 1 45.44.45.97


University of SurreyGuildfordSurrey GU2 5XH - United KingdomWho?Khurshid Ahmad, Caroline Jones, Andrew Salway

Tel: 44/1483 300 800Tel: 44/1483 259 322 (Caroline)Tel: 44/1483 259 633 (Andrew)Fax: 44/1483 259385 (or 44/1483 300 803)

E-mail: [email protected]@mcs.surrey.ac.uk

EC Project officer’s name and address Phone / Fax / E-mail

European CommissionDirectorate General XIIIUnit E-6EUFO 1188Rue Alcide de GasperiL-2920 LuxembourgWho?Josep Soler

Tel: 352.43.01.33.291Fax: 352.43.01.34.655



3REPORTS

3.1INDIVIDUAL WEEKLY HOURLY REPORTS

Each partner should establish bi-monthly reports describing the activities of the persons involved in the project with a precise weekly hourly description per task. Each partner will transmit copies of his individual weekly hourly reports with the BMR to the Co-ordinator.

3.2BI-MONTHLY MANAGEMENT REPORTS

Every two months, each member of the Consortium will redact a bi-monthly management report. This report consists of two parts: i) a part for the calculation of efforts spent on each task; ii) a part that will be used by the Co-ordinator to provide the Commission with a bi-monthly management report. This document will have to be sent to the Co-ordinator by each Partner at least 10 days before submission to the Commission (see table below for bi-monthly management reports programme).

This report shall be presented based upon the file which all partners will receive (*BMR-00.DOC).

Bi-monthly management report procedures:

· each Associated Partner will transmit his Bi-monthly management report to his corresponding Main Partner, who will transmit a copy to the Co-ordinator, CL,

· each Main Partner will transmit his Bi-monthly management report to the Co-ordinator, CL,

· the Co-ordinator will transmit the Bi-monthly INTERVAL management report to the CEC.

Bi-monthly management reports programme:

1996 1997 1998

BMR01, end of March BMR05, end of January BMR10, end of JanuaryBMR02, end of May BMR06, end of March(1st semestrial report) BMR07, end of MayBMR03, end of September (2nd semestrial report)BMR04, end of November BMR08, end of September

BMR09, end of November

3.3SEMESTRIAL PROGRESS REPORTS

Two semestrial Progress Reports (one for each phase) will be presented to the CEC, following the model in the TA Guide, Appendix. The costs statements will accompany the


semestrial report. The costs statements will have to be sent to the Co-ordinator by each Partner at least 10 days before submission to the Commission.

Semestrial report programme:

· 1st semestrial report, end of July 1996, Phase I

· 2nd semestrial report, end of July 1997, Phase II

3.4EVALUATION REPORT

At the end of month 10 of the project, an evaluation report will be presented by the Co-ordinator to the Commission. This report shall enable the Commission to evaluate the first work performed, in order to assess the first phase, before granting the second phase of the project. The evaluation report will have to be submitted to the Commission on 29 November 1996.

3.5PUBLIC ANNUAL REPORTS

Public annual reports, which include the public documents (part of the deliverables).

3.6FINAL REPORT FOR THE FIRST PHASE

The INTERVAL final report for the first phase will include all work carried out, as well as the results obtained. It will be presented at the end of January 1997.

A second final report will be presented at the end of the second phase and will include the work and results over the whole project

3.7INTERVAL PUBLIC DOCUMENTS

The INTERVAL Consortium will, as soon as they are validated by the members and the Users’ Club, make available - for each key task - a public document. For instance, evaluation of terminology quality, how to prepare reusable resources, how to consolidate terminological resources, to validate terminological resources, etc. They will also be made available on World Wide Web.

These documents form part of the Dissemination Plan which will be established within the T05 framework.

3.8BI-MONTHLY INTERVAL NEWSLETTER

The Bi-monthly INTERVAL newsletter will be sent to the outside world not only to make contact with the Consortium, but also to make it aware of the progress of the project. It will also be available on World Wide Web.


The format of this newsletter was defined during the first weeks of the project in the course of T00 and T05, as well as its addressees, i.e. Consortium, Users’ Club, users and clients of INTERVAL members, ELRA, etc.

3.9DELIVERABLES AND OTHER INTERVAL DOCUMENTS

Each partner will have to:

· use the styles and structure of the template INTERVAL.DOT for current documents: instructions, contributions, questionnaires, survey aids, results, etc.,

· name the files in a coherent and significant way, using systematically:

- the Partner code: CL, LCI, LMD, TC, TR, UL, TR, WS,

- the Task number:T00 for the Task 00, etc.

· respect the presentation rules defined by the Co-ordinator

· draft the Deliverables in English,

· draft instructions and work documents in a language understood by the all partners involved.


4WP AND TASK FUNCTIONS AND RESPONSIBILITIES

4.1THE CONTRIBUTOR

The obligations of a contributor with regards to the person responsible for the Task are fundamental. Moreover the following should be borne in mind:

· Need for validation of the work programme established by the person responsible, in particular the work and sub-tasks which concern him/her, according to his/her competence, staff, the number of man/days allocated, etc. The contributor has to evaluate without delay the feasibility of the work planned in the work programme. His critical role will be an active and positive one in order to adjust and balance this programme at an early stage.

· Fulfilment of allotted tasks in order to ensure the adequate performance of the work. The initiation and progress of other Tasks must be taken into account, in particular if those Tasks depend on the work currently being carried out.

· Need to send information, especially everything concerning delays or problems that have arisen.

In conclusion, the fulfilment of obligations of the partners towards the relevant responsible person is a prerequisite for the other partners, and above all is essential for the success of INTERVAL.

4.2THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR A TASK

4.2.1Management of work within a Task

4.2.1.1The Work Programme

The person responsible for the Task must establish a Work Programme allocating the precise sub-tasks to all the different contributors in accordance with the number of man/months stated in the contract1. This work programme will be submitted to the person responsible for the WP.

His/her duties will also include:

· Taking into account the area of competence of each partner involved, and each one's location when deciding the distribution of work and missions for tasks such as inventories or surveys.

· To inform the partners of their sub-tasks and to give them adequate instructions.

1 Clauses 4.1 and 4.2 of the INTERVAL contract specify the figures per Task and per partner. Note that 0.25 man/months are equivalent to 5 working days.


· To follow up the each contributor's production in relation to the sub-tasks previously defined.

· To remind all concerned of the deadlines on a regular basis, remind the partners of all the points previously established (the day before or several days before according to the volume of work).

4.2.1.2The circulation of information

The person responsible will be in charge of relaying information back to the contributors on a regular basis and forwarding it both to the person responsible for the WP and to the co-ordinator (CL). When he/she deems it necessary the person responsible will distribute documents to all the other partners as well as to the Task contributors.

On March 21 the co-ordinator (CL) will distribute a description of the procedure which has to be followed in order to complete the reports.

4.2.1.3Working language

The person responsible will take care of transmitting documents, instructions, reports, etc., in a language understood by everyone, and drafting the Deliverables in English.

4.2.1.4Management of man/days

Three cases may arise:

· The man/days stated in the contract correspond exactly to the efforts required for the performance of the work and sub-tasks given to a partner.

· Too many man/days have been allocated in the contract. It is important to make the most of them in working for improved Task results or for INTERVAL. The man/days allocated and used must genuinely correspond to a specific volume of work. The surplus of man/days is to be allocated to the performance of other WP Tasks.

· The number of man/days initially allocated is insufficient. It is hoped that the man/days not used for other Tasks will be sufficient to cover this deficit. Efficient administration and the choice of the most appropriate procedures are crucial.

We hope that the first situation is the case, and that both the others will be exceptions to the rule.

When drafting the contract, we have distributed the man/days according to descriptions of work given by future partners and their recommendations, whilst also taking into account the Commission’s advice. The number of man/days should be shared out fairly among the different Tasks. Nevertheless during the two year course of the project it is likely that some deviation may take place (a non-contributing partner able to participate actively in a Task, under-valued or over-valued work, etc.).


All those involved should note that:

· As requested by the Commission2, each partner must complete time/Task progress charts to ensure each Task's monitoring on a weekly basis. These charts will enable everyone to control the use of man/days effectively.

· It is of the utmost importance to foresee and anticipate deficits. It is therefore necessary to check the status of work allocated to the partners involved at least weekly in order to detect any delays and problems at the earliest possible stage.

· It is essential to ensure the adequate distribution of information among the partners involved and that communication is maintained with the person responsible. All parties must work together to discover the cause of any problem and to find the best possible solution. Any deficit or surplus must be explained immediately to the person responsible for the WP.

· Should the need arise it is possible to arrange the exchange of man/days between partners working on the same Task or between Tasks. However the overall number of man/days allotted to each partner must to be respected for the duration of the contract.

· The Management Committee must take adequate measures in order to solve problems arising from a lack of man/days (due to under-evaluation or to unforeseen circumstances) or the consumption of man/days without significant results (as a consequence of a partners failure, for example).

· Finally, the Commission must be notified of any modifications, and their inclusion will possibly depend on the Commission's agreement.

The person responsible for the Task will have to evaluate the actual number of man/days used according to the amount of work, the contributions, and the results produced by each partner involved.

4.2.1.5The involvement of non-contributing partners

Not all Consortium partners have been allocated man/days for each Task. Therefore the work schedule will have to be established by the person responsible without taking these partners into account. Nevertheless the person responsible will be able to ask the non-contributing partners to participate in:

· Validation missions - as each partner has man/days available for validation,

· Recommending and providing contacts with organisations or potential users,

· Circulating those documents already at their disposal,

· Any other task which should represent negligible cost and time for the partner.

The assignment of a complicated task (which implies time and costs for a partner who was not allocated man/days for this Task) will entail the modification of the project’s costs established in the contract, and therefore the Commission will have to be notified and its permission obtained. This case may well arise and it will require more serious study conjointly with the Commission before engaging in the work.

2 Cf. request made by José Soler during the Kick-Off Meeting in Madrid, 14 February 1996.


4.2.2Administration of the calendar

4.2.2.1Task Calendar

The person responsible for the Task must see to:

· The establishing a coherent calendar of actions including deadlines (for the validation of documents, delivery of contributions etc.), events (such as meetings, consultation with the Users’ Club, etc.). He will therefore schedule the development of the Task - the logical linking of the different stages, the duration of each stage, the date set for the delivery of information or validation, etc. - in accordance with:

- The timescales envisaged in the contract,

- The number of man/days which the partners involved in the Task have available to them and the staff working on the Task's completion (each partner is responsible for the availability of his own team),

- The possible implications associated with the development of simultaneous Tasks, or the commencement of subsequent Tasks,

- The time necessary for validation.

· The adequate co-ordination of events between different Tasks, and between simultaneous WP’s, is to be carried out adequate reporting to the person responsible for the WP, who will then pool this information centrally. If need be he/she will also co-ordinate the Tasks. The co-ordinator (CL) will be responsible for the co-ordination of the WP’s.

4.2.3Task Validation

The person responsible for the Task must send the results:

· To all partners whether involved in the Task or not,

· To the members of the Scientific Committee 3,

· To members of the Users’ Club, if their validation is necessary at this level4,

· By the set dates and using the most efficient means of transmission available, preferably electronic mail, making sure that all the recipients have the necessary file-handling tools (software, compression and encoding programmes, etc.).

The person responsible must plan the validation of the work sufficiently in advance, and in the case of public diffusion take into account the time necessary for updating the documents produced immediately after distribution.

3 Important note: calling these proceedings must be decided upon in advance conjointly with the person responsible for the WP and the co-ordinator and set down in the work programme.

4 The same applies for the Scientific Committee.


To sum up, we must emphasise that validation is an ongoing process throughout the Task, and that the person responsible must request validation with respect to the production of results and documents from the partners on a regular basis. He/she may likewise ask for a contribution from either some or all members of the Scientific Committee or Users' Club during the development of the work (The validation of the work programme, terms of reference, questionnaires, etc.).

4.3THE PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR WP

The person responsible for WP may be regarded as a person responsible for a Task, with the exception that his/her responsibilities are wider. In particular his/her role is to ensure the correct performance of the following:

· The correct handling of the WP, the co-ordination of the activities, taking care of simultaneous work between Tasks and WP,

· Providing a link between the people responsible for the Task, and possibly managing the priorities,

· Keeping the co-ordinator informed,

· Assisting the co-ordinator in the preparation of plans and reports.


5INTERVAL INSTITUTIONS

5.1THE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, ‘MC’

The pilot project requires the appointment of a Management Committee which will be responsible for running the INTERVAL project.

5.1.1Functions and Responsibilities of the Management Committee

The role, the attributions and the functioning of the Management Committee will be defined in the Consortium Agreement signed by the INTERVAL Main Partners.

The Management Committee has the final control and responsibility for the outline project on all technical and financial matters.

The Management Committee will particularly:

· provide overall supervision of the project,

· be responsible for the project,

· approve project plans,

· give direction and guidance,

· make assessments,

· be responsible for financial control,

· approve expenditure and spend profiles,

· decide technical options,

· approve texts for information dissemination,

· decide on actions.

The contracting partners will mutually agree on measures to be taken.

5.1.2Chairman of the Management Committee

The Chairman of the Management Committee is responsible for:

· approving all payments of expenditure associated with the pilot/demonstration project,

· approval of agendas and minutes,

· liaison with the project co-ordinator on all matters associated with the project.


5.1.3Management Committee members

They are the INTERVAL Main Partners:

· CL, Norbert Kalfon, Chairman of the Management Committee

· LCI, Erik Lebreton

· LMD, Michel Feutry

· WS, Markus Rantapuu

· TR, Matthias Heyn

5.1.4Management Meetings

Two types of meetings will be regularly held to ensure an efficient control of the project:

· Management Committee Meetings : five meetings are planned, at key dates of the project, at the beginning and at the end of WorkPackages (see also Project Timetable).

· WorkPackage Management Meetings : one meeting with WorkPackage Team Leaders and the main representatives of project contractors will be held to define precisely each WorkPackage (see also Project Timetable).

5.1.4.1Management Committee Meetings Programme

MC Meetings Date Place

MC 1 12 February 1996 Madrid, CL premises

Kick off Meeting 14 February 1996 Madrid, CL premises

MC 2 24 July 1996 Paris, CL premises

MC 3 28 November 1996 or 2 December 1996

Madrid, CL premises

MC 4 February / March 1997

MC 5 September / October 1997


5.1.4.2WP Management Meetings Programme

WP Management Meetings Date Place

WP 0 MM Tuesday 13 February 1996 Madrid, CL premises

WP 1 MM Wednesday 10 April 1996 Madrid, CL premises

WP 2 MM to be defined Paris, LMD premises

WP 3 MM November 1996 Madrid, CL premises

WP 4 MM 14 February 1996 Madrid, CL premises

WP 5 MM February 1997

WP 6 MM October 1997

5.1.4.3WP Progress Meetings

WP Progress Meetings Date Place

WP 0 PM Wednesday 10 April 1996 Madrid, CL premises

WP 0 PM Tuesday 23 July 1996 Paris, CL premises

WP 0 PM 28 November or 2 December 1996

Madrid, CL premises


WP 1 PM 28 November or 2 December 1996

Madrid, CL premises

WP 4 PM Wednesday 10 April 1996 Madrid, CL premises


WP 4 PM Tuesday 12 November 1996 Brussels, TR premises

5.2CONCERTATION - CLUSTER MEETING REPRESENTATION

· LE Launch conference on 11 and 12 January 1996 in Luxembourg

- INTERVAL was represented by CL (N. Kalfon, A. Crespel, E. Quillot)

· 1st Cluster Co-ordination Meeting, LE Resources- 10/11 June 1996, in Luxembourg, whose purposes were to:

- create a common knowledge platform,

- discuss and consolidate communication plans (e.g. awareness, dissemination, etc.),

- discuss and compare approaches to market research and user needs analysis and modelling.

- INTERVAL was represented by CL (A. Crespel) and LCI (E. Lubert)

· 2nd cluster meeting on 21 and 22 October 1996 in Brussels, whose purposes are to:


- establish cluster user forums,

- discuss results of preliminary stages of work (market research, user requirements, key features of functional specifications, etc.) from a user point of view,

- discuss and compare approaches to verification tests (iteration, timescales, procedures, etc.),

- review and update communication plans.

- INTERVAL was represented by CL (E. Quillot)

· by 18 November 1996 : provide LINGLINK with a progress report on INTERVAL promotional and dissemination activities.

5.3THE SCIENTIFIC COMMITTEE, ‘SC’

5.3.1The SC Functions

The Scientific Committee will:



· propose technical options,

· approve texts for information dissemination,

· ensure the validity and the conformity of every decision taken regarding the definition of specifications, methodologies and models,

· participate on the first assessment of each deliverable,

· assess the quality of the proposed models and their conformity to the terms of references specified in WP 0, together with the recommendations of other related projects, particularly POINTER, TRANSTERM and the ISO recommendations.

5.3.2The SC Meetings

Scientific Committee meetings will be held for WorkPackages with all members involved in it in order to define, discuss and validate actions and priorities of the project. Three meetings are scheduled: SC 1, SC 2 and SC 35.

5.3.3The SC Members

Members Address Phone, Fax, E-mail

Daniel Gouadec Université de Rennes 2UFR de LEA

Tel: 33.(0)2 99.33.13.37Fax: 33.(0) 2 99.33.51.75

5 to be determined according to members availability


6, av Gaston Berger35043 Rennes - France


Antonio Soto Arroyo Fontarrón, 2128030 Madrid - SpainStudio House Acacias4, route des Acacias1227 Genève - Switzerland

Tel: 34 1 449 40 30Fax: E-mail:

Thomas Schneider Feldbergstr, 4681825 München - Germany

Tel: 49 89 430 9753Fax: E-mail:

Amelia de Irazazábal Juan de Urbieta, 6128007 Madrid - SpainorUP ComillasAlberto Aguilera, 23

Tel: 34 1 443 58 76Fax: 34 1 345 02 45E-mail: Tel: 34 1 542 88 00

Christian Galinski INFOTERMSimmering. Hauptstr.1110 Vienna - Austria

Tel: 43 (1) 740.40.441Fax: 43 (1) 740.40.740e-mail: [email protected]

5.4THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE, ‘TEC’

5.4.1The TEC Functions

The Technical Committee, formed by software engineers from CL, LCI, Resumix, TRADOS and WS, will:

· validate the technological aspects of the project (tools, software management),

· co-ordinate the development of software and tools resulting from the project,



· propose technical options,

· ensure the adequatness of technical procedures used during the development of tools and software,

· participate in the first assessment of each deliverable,

· contribute their criteria to ensure that results are adjusted to today’s technology and to tomorrow’s possibilities.

5.4.2The TEC Meetings

Technical Committee (TEC) meetings will be held in order to discuss and solve technical issues, partially before and during the development of tools.


TEC Meetings Date Place

TEC 1 12 November 1996 Brussels, TR premises

TEC 2 January 1997

TEC 3 September / October 1997

5.4.3The TEC members

Members Address Phone, Fax, E-mail

CL,Antonio del Saz

CL Servicios Lingüísticos S.A.C/Fuencarral, 12328010 Madrid - Spain

Tel: 34 (1) 448 58 61Fax: 34 (1) 593 05 95E-mail: [email protected] [email protected]

LCI,Adrien Assous

LCICentre d’Affaires du Bois de Jouy5, rue du Petit Robinson78350 Jouy-en-Josas Cedex - France

Tel: 33 (0) 1 34.65.77.77Fax: 33 (0) 1 34.65.90.97E-mail: [email protected]

ResumixPaul Holmes-Higgin

ResumixRenaissance House32 Upper High StreetEpsomSurrey KT17 4QJ - United Kingdom

Tel: 44 1372 745777Fax: 44 1372 743429E-mail: [email protected]

TR,Matthias Heyn

TRADOS Benelux S.A.Av. de Tervuren 3031150 Bruxelles - Belgium

Tel: 32 (2) 771 69 60, new number soonFax: 32 (2) 771 70 43, new number soonE-mail: [email protected] [email protected]

WS, Pekka Kähkipuro

Western Systems OyVallikallionkatu 102600 Espoo - Finland

Tel: 358 (9) 615 6600Fax: 358 (9) 615 66400E-mail: [email protected]


5.5THE USERS’ CLUB, ‘UC’

In order to prepare and to ensure a good control of these meetings, the methodology and procedure for the evaluation of data and results produced by the Users’ Clubs will be defined during WP 0, task T00.

Moreover, the use of E-mail will enable regular and efficient information and data interchange between Users’ Club members between meetings and Interchange and feedback procedures between Project Managers and Users' Club will be defined at a very early stage of the project.

CL is the Interval Users’ Club Co-ordinator.

5.5.1Users’ Club Functions

The Users' Club will validate the results obtained of INTERVAL. The Users’ Club members will:

· be the major target of the T01 survey, Identification of user needs,

· assess the global quality of the results from the standpoint of their needs, of their viability and of the impact on their multilingual communication costs,

· be permanently informed of the evolution and the results of each task; they will also receive the INTERVAL Newsletter,

· verify the deliverables received by email or during workshops and meetings,

· receive test units before the production of the demonstrators - only the beta testers chosen among the UC.

The Users’ Club members have committed themselves to using the methodologies issuing from the project.

5.5.2Users’ Club Meetings

The date and the place where the meetings will be held, will be determined later on by the Management Committee.

During the project and for each subject field, three meetings will be held with all the Users’ Club members and corresponding representatives of the workpackages (Project Managers and WP leaders). These meetings will be held, as far as possible, at each local Partner level, in order to reduce travel costs.

Finally, extra-ordinary meetings will also be organised between Users’ Clubs members and local INTERVAL partners.


5.5.3Users’ Club Members

Code Name and addresses Phone, fax, E-mail Field (Country)

AAR Aardvark Translations Services LtdGeoffrey Samuelsson-Brown32/33 High Street, AscotBerkshire SL5 7HG, United Kingdom

Tel.: 44 1344 872787Fax: 44 1344 874919Modem: 44 1344 874327E-mail: [email protected]

telecom.finances(UK)

AFN AFNOR (Association Française de Normalisation)Patricia RibouletTour EuropeCedex 792049 Paris La Défense - France

Tel: 33 (0) 1 42 91 60 70Fax: 33 (0) 1 42 91 56 56E-mail: not available

telecom.finances(FR)

ASC Ascom LtdMassimo MercurialiBelpstrasse 37P.O. BoxCH-3000 Berne 14Switzerland

Tel: 41 31 999 21 11Fax: 41 31 999 20 94

telecom.(CH)

CCI Chambre de commerce InternationaleMlle ProtMme Pathiaux38 CoursAlbert 1er75008 Paris

Tel: 33 (0) 1 49 53 29 08

CTN CTN, Centre de terminologie et de néologie - CNRSJohn HumbleyUniversité de Paris Nord IIAv. J.-B. Clément93430 VilletaneuseFrance


telecom.finances(FR)

DIT DIT, Deutsches Institut für Terminologie e.V.Rochusplatz 1055252 Mainz-KastelGermany

Tel: 49 (6134) 22.504Fax: 49 (6134) 22.860E-mail: [email protected]

telecom.finances(DE)

EQU Equipe Consortium LtdMerlin Place, Milton RoadCambridge CB4 4OPUnited Kingdom

Tel: 44 1223 350 340Fax: E-mail: [email protected]


FIG Livraria Editor Figueirinhas, LdaFrancisco PimentaRua do Almada 474000 Porto - Portugal

Tel: 351 53 325 300Fax: 351 53 325 907E-mail: not available

telecom.finances(PT)



FRY Fry & Bonthrone - Language Consultancy & ServicesRochusplatz 1055252 Mainz-KastelGermany


telecom.finances(DE)

GLO GLOSSIMASavas Pavlidis12, Aristotelous546 43 ThessalonikiGreece


telecom.finances(GR)

HAT Verlag Alexandre Hatier, BerlinMarie-Jeanne DerouinDetmolder Str. 410715 Berlin - Germany

Tel: 49 30 854 50 87/88Fax: 49 30 854 50 89E-mail: not available

telecom.(DE)

IFE Institut for ErhvervsinformatikGert EngelEngstien 36000 Kolding - Denmark

Tel: 45 75 50 60 35Fax: 45 75 50 72 75E-mail: [email protected]

telecom.finances(DK)

INI INIST, Institut de l’information scientifique et techniqueNadia Viscogliosi2, allée du Parc de Brabois54514 Vandoeuvre-lès-Nancy CedexFrance

Tel: 33.(0) 3 83.50.46.00Fax: 33.(0) 3 83.50.46.50E-mail: [email protected]

telecom.(FR)

INT INT, Institut national des télécommunicationsAggeliki Fotopoulou9, rue Charles Fourier91011 EvryFrance


telecom.(FR)

KIE Kielikone OyDr. Harri ArnolaVattuniemenkuja 4PL 12600211 HelsinkiFinland

Tel: (358) 0 6820 211Fax: (358) 0 6820 167E-mail: [email protected]

telecom.finances(FI)

MIF Ministère des FinancesCentre de traductionService de TerminologieSophie Rouy149, Rue de Bercy75012 Paris

Tel: 33 (0) 1 44 87 12 30Fax: 33 (0) 1 44 87 11 05

finances(FR)



PTT General Directorate Swiss PTTFrench Translation ServiceViktoriastrasse 213030 Berne - Switzerland

Tel.: 41 31 338 26 56Fax: 41 31 338 79 35E-mail: not available

telecom.finances(CH)

RAN Rank Xerox Language Technology CentreFrancesca ZanetteKey West, 4th Floor53-61 Windsor RoadSlough, Berkshire SL1 2EE, United Kingdom

Tel.: 44 1753 512600Fax: 44 1753 512488E-mail: [email protected]


TEL TELCEL-MOTOROLAJavier Vaquero EgeaPza. Pablo Ruiz Picasso snTorre Picasso, planta 37. A-B28020 Madrid - Spain

Tel: 34 1 555 05 32Fax: 34 1 556 52 67E-mail: not available

telecom.(ES)

TER TermistiDaniel Blampain34, Rue J. Hazard1180 Bruxelles - Belgium

Tel: 32 2 346 2641Fax: 32 2 346 2134E-mail: [email protected]

telecom.finances(BE)

TSK Tekniikan SanastokeskusKatri LempinenAlbertinkatu 23 A 1200120 Helsinki - Finland

Tel: 358 0 2709 1060Fax: 358 0 608 859E-mail: [email protected].

telecom.finances(FI)

UIT UIT (Union Internationale des Télécommunications)Antonio PeñarandaPlace des Nations1211 Genève 20 - Switzerland

Tel: 41 22 730 59 71Fax: 41 22 730 52 20E-mail: not available

telecom.(CH)

VER VERBAEmilio G. Muñiz CastroUrb. Las Suertes, chalet 6328400 C. Villalba (Madrid) - Spain

Tel: 34 (1) 851 41 65Fax: 34 (1) 851 36 69E-mail: [email protected]

telecom.finances(ES)

ZEU ZEUS E.E.I.G.Spiros SirmakessisMaizonos 74-7826221 Patras - Greece

Tel: 30 61 62 26 55/62 34 83Fax: 30 61 27 24 25E-mail: [email protected]

telecom.(GR)


6INTERVAL WORK PROGRAMME

6.1WP 0, IDENTIFICATION OF USER NEEDS, EXISTING TERMINOLOGY AND AVAILABILITY

Objectives To identify user needs and to define the terms of reference for the project.

CL All partners

This workpackage is meant to establish terms of reference and a quality plan for:

· terminology work in general so as to set up “quality absolutes” in the areas of:

- human resources,

- management,

- software requirements,

- selection of information sources,

- selection of informants,

- identification of terminological data,

- data organisation rules,

- data items and data definition.

· consolidation work so as to derive the quality criteria applicable for consolidation:

- as concerns the roughcut assessment of probable quality levels,

- as concerns the criteria for identifying necessary operations on existing data,

- as concerns the selection of resources used for upgrading existing data,

- as concerns the guidelines for upgrading existing categories of data.

DeliverablesD0a, User needs specifications, Specifications

D0b, How to elaborate terminology, Models

D0c, Exhaustive survey of available terminological resources, Technical report

D0d, Copyright and legal recommendations, Models

D0e, Exploitation plan, Plan

D0f, Marketing plan, Plan

D0g, Dissemination and Concertation plan, Plan

D0h, Terms of reference


6.2WP 1, QUALITY EVALUATION OF EXISTING TERMINOLOGIES

Objectives To compile and evaluate available terminology for the project.

CL All partners

- Before the start of the terminological work, correctly speaking, this Workpackage aims at defining the rules for a qualitative evaluation of terminology resources and at applying them to already identified resources for the two selected subject fields. The validated data will constitute the corpora of the base which is to be acquired (WP 2) and to be consolidated (WP 3).

Deliverables D1a, Criteria for terminology resources evaluation, Models

D1b, First terminology sampling, Data

D1c, Language availability statistics, Technical report

D1d, Quality report, Technical report

6.3WP 2, ACQUISITION

Objectives To set-up terminology collections for each treated domain.

LMD All partners

The aim of this workpackage is to acquire good quality terminology as defined in WP 1, from many validated sources in order to constitute single lists for each subject field to be dealt with in WP 3. It will also contribute to define a model for terminology acquisition which could be reused in other situations.

- A part of the budget is dedicated to resources acquisition (41.500 ECUs; see TFA, 4.2, Cost breakdown by category for each contractor, page 59).

Deliverables D2a, Models for acquisition, Models

D2b, Final TR list for corpora creation, Technical report

Dependencies with WP 0 (T04) and WP 1 (T14)


6.4WP 3, CONSOLIDATION AND VALIDATION

Objectives To produce validated terminology collections for each domain.

CL All partners

The aim of this WP is to deliver a validated corpus for two domains in at least five or six languages. Even though the goal is not to cover the eleven European languages, during the validation process no language restriction will be applied and quality will be the only criterion. Catalan language will be covered from the very first step.

- According to the terms of reference of WP 0 we will orient the tasks as shown in the chart (see TFA, 2.3.3, Approach and methodology for terminology validation).

Deliverables D3a, Consolidation methodology guidelines, Models

D3b, Validation methodology guidelines, Models

D3c, Validated final corpus for each domain, Data

6.5WP 4, TOOLS, COMPATIBILITY AND DATA EXCHANGE ISSUES

Objectives To implement a validation kit for terminological processings and to analyse portability and compatibility of the results by creating exchange models.

WS All partners

- This workpackage will lead to the creation of a set of tools and proposals for network facilities to make available the widest range of exchange and compatibility possibilities for terminological data.

Deliverables D4a, Validation kit, Software

D4b, World Wide Web Interface, Tool

Feasible adjustment

Task T41 will have to be extended to Phase II, at least until the end of Task 36 (July 1997), in order to ensure the updating of the validation kit, according to the suggestions of WP 3 (enhancements, errors, etc.).

Task T42 will have to start during Phase I, in order to implement the World Wide Web at a very early stage of the project (internal communication, first actions of dissemination, etc.).


6.6WP 5, PRODUCTION OF DEMONSTRATORS

Objectives To produce demonstrators presenting project results.

LCI All partners

The result of the project will, firstly, be the creation of a CD-ROM to be used as demonstrator containing all the terminology to be made available, the validation kit and the drafting of a set of public documents in various languages:

· Producing a CD-ROM: The data collected and formatted in the previous phases of the project will first be validated on a hard disk, at which stage minor modifications may be made, if necessary. A test CD-ROM will then be produced to check that the system operates correctly using this support (performance, reliability, security, integrity, etc.). The finalised data will then be pressed on a CD-ROM, to be used as demonstrators. The data format will be made compatible with the validation kit format, and data may be accessed from all the most currently used word processing applications (WordPerfect 5.2, WinWord 6, etc.).

· Documentation: The documentation for the INTERVAL project will include a set of documents in various languages (English, French, German, and Spanish).

- All project documents (internal and external) will be checked for consistency by WP 5 responsible partner, subsequent to which they will be validated.

Deliverables D5a, Demonstrators, Demonstrator

6.7WP 6, EXPLOITATION, DISTRIBUTION, AND DISSEMINATION

Objectives To establish the dissemination and marketing strategies. To deliver final results.

LCI All partners

This workpackage will assure the widest diffusion and distribution of INTERVAL project results - CD-ROM, public documentation, WWW. It will based on a series of actions for advertising and market awareness, a free of charge delivery to all European public institutions, Users' Club members, Consortium Members, etc.

- The second phase includes a plan for future work and activities, with the related financial plans, whose aim is to provide for self-supporting conditions.

Deliverables D6a, Follow-up strategy report, Plan

D6b, Final report, Report

Feasible adjustment

Participation of Trados in Task 64 has to be planned


6.8PROJECT TIMETABLE

M WP

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24

WP0

T00 - CL

T01 - TC

T02 - CL

T03 - LMD

T04 - LMD

T05 - LCI

T06 - CL

WP1

T10 - CL

T11 - CL

T12 - TC

T13 - TC

T14 - CL

T15 - TR

T16 - CL

WP2

T20 - LMD

T21 - LMD

T22 - LMD

WP3

T30 - CL

T31 - CL

T32 - CL

T33 - CL

T34 - CL

T35 - CL

T36 - CL

T37 - CL

WP4

T40 - WS


T41 - TR

T42 - TR

T43 - WS

WP5

T50 - LCI

T51 - LCI

T52 - CL

T53 - LCI

T54 - LCI

WP6

T60 - LCI

T61 - CL

T62 - LCI

T63 - LCI

T64 - LCI

T65 - LCI

T66 - LCI

Klàà

U DDDàn

DDD�

DDDDDt

làD

StDDD

DD

E ln�àà

Pàt

lU

D DSt

ln�àtU

D DDFPt

t : Milestone à : WP Management meeting S : Semestrial Progress ReportK : Kick-off meeting U : Users' Club Workshop n : TEC Meetingl : Management Committee D : Deliverable P : Public Annual Report� : SC Meeting F : Final Report E Evaluation ReportWe will also produce a Bi-monthly Management Report, a Bi-monthly Newsletter and, as far as the Synthesis Reports are concerned they will be scheduled according to the CEC requirements.


7IDENTIFICATION OF USER NEEDS, EXISTING TERMINOLOGY AND AVAILABILITY - FIRST RESULTS

7.1T01 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

7.1.1Purpose

As the INTERVAL project aims at preparing methods and tools for terminology validation, one of the first tasks carried out within the project has been the identification of users needs concerning the validation of existing terminological resources.

«1 “In spite of the voluminous inventories of terminology resources (...) catalogued in many countries (and which are not only confined to the major languages), users consider existing resources as largely inadequate, since they are not specialised enough, are insufficiently elaborated, are not up-to-date, are insufficiently validated, are not available in the languages required and are not publicised if they are.” POINTER Final Report (p. 75)

7.1.2Methodology

Taking into account the conclusions elaborated within the POINTER framework and the experience of INTERVAL partners in terminology field, the methodology used to obtain an accurate description of users needs has been the elaboration of in-depth and qualitative interviews among selected and representative groups of users, already aware of terminology relevance or involved in terminology work.

For the selection of users two variables have been taken into account which were intended to lead to different ways of approaching terminological resources:

- the kind of user expertise (experts, computer scientists, language professionals)

- the sector in which they operate (private, public, academic)

The validation of terminological resources has been envisaged as the result of a global working process aiming at their reusability. Its requirements had been elicited at differents levels:

· Content specifications

- data categories (equivalents, definition, conceptual relations, ...)

- dissemination format (electronic, paper)

· Methodological description

· Authority requirements

- quality level


- organisation in charge of the validation process (standardization organisations, language academies, terminology centres, professional associations, ...)

· Human resources professional profile

7.1.3General Trends

The general trends expressed by the users concerning validation requirements can be resumed as follows.

Content specifications

Concerning the data that a quality terminological resource should contain, experts (EXP) and language professionals (LP) have distinguished the nature of data according to what they consider to be essential data (ED), desirable data (DD) and irrelevant data (ID).

EQUIVALENTS

GRAMMAR INFORMATION

DEFINITION CONCEPTUAL

RELATIONS

CODE FIELD

RELIABILITY CODE

CONTEXTS, NOTES

EXP ED ED DD DD DD DD DD ID

LP ED ED ED ED ED ED DD

Methodological description

Considered a useful means to evaluate the resource itself, the methodological description should state at least the intended objectives of the terminological collection, its conceptual structure and scope, its information sources, the specialists who took part in its elaboration, the organisations they belong to and the criteria applied to cope with neologism creation.

Validation process

The general opinion is that the ideal validation process should be organised with the participation of professionals drawn from different sectors by means of already existing bodies specialised in terminological activities, so that all potential terminology users could be represented.

Human resources

Unanimity has been reached among users that terminological work must be shared in mixed working groups integrating experts --with recognised domain knowledge, professional prestige, linguistic sensitiveness, awareness of the impact of terminology-- and terminologists --with knowledge of terminological research methodology and database software, experience in project organisation and management, documentation techniques.


Usage specifications

All users agree that reusability is the final aim of terminological work, therefore they are highly interested to have access to validated terminological information, mainly to reuse it from the most common software applications: spelling checkers, document management data bases, terminological data bases, corporate information systems, assisted-translation systems, and so on.


The Interval project aims to define and develop models and methods needed for terminological validation work. A preliminary definition of this validation work is given in the Task T01 deliverable. In order to get a validation project of this kind underway it is worth establishing, on the basis of the given definition, the various stages of the process.

· Definition of the objectives and domains dealt with by the project (work-plan, selection of terminologists and experts, definition of the domain tree, etc.)

· Drawing up an inventory; qualitative analysis; selection and acquisition of terminological resources (document search, application of a quality matrix, retrieval/extraction of data, etc.)

· Resource consolidation (semantic and formal correction, interlinguistic and intralinguistic validation, redundancy checking, conceptual reorganisation, etc.)

· Verification that the final resource is valid and up-to-date (by working with experts, checking the contextual validity of the resource, etc.)

The aim of Task T02 was therefore to draw up methodological recommendations for the different stages of the validation process. These recommendations need to be grouped together and developed within the framework of the other project tasks and so are described in this document under the following headings:6

· Procedure for selecting expertise and Co-operation between experts and terminologists

· Quality objectives and criteria

· Consolidation

In order to obtain a more complete picture of the practical reality of the context in which developments and methodological recommendations were being made a survey of a number of market actors was undertaken. The questionnaire is included in annex.

6 The Standardisation and Neology proposals section have no direct link with the other project tasks, so will its development will take place later in the project’s life.


For each section we have found the following characteristics:

· Procedure for selecting expertise and Co-operation between experts and terminologists

- Defining the participation of an external expert or terminologist.

- Choosing the expert whose area of competence and knowledge are best suited to the terminological resource being dealt with.

- Defining a precise work programme with the external collaborator, taking the collaborator’s availability and cost into account.

- Training the collaborator in the methodology and tools to be used for the work and guiding his or her work according to the project objectives.

- Carrying out regular monitoring of the work’s progress.

- Checking, evaluating and correcting the work in constant contact with the external collaborator.

· Quality objectives and criteria

- Aims and scope of the quality evaluation: The re-usability of terminological data.

- Definition of a common quality evaluation matrix, including two series of criteria:

à1 General criteria: Media and access; domain organisation and indication; indications of working methods; presence of a bibliography; degree of expertise of the author; inclusion of standardised terminology.

à2 Specific criteria: Conceptual data organisation, indication of reference for each information, inclusion of a definition for every concept, coherent data presentation and consistency of the links between entries, inclusion of a single-language index, presence of original definitions for each language, inclusion of contextual or linguistic or explanatory information, accuracy of information

- Application of the evaluation matrix:

· Consolidation

- Objectives: Retrieval and sharing of pre-existing terminological data.

- Stages preceding consolidation: Prior definition of consolidation objectives; creation of a terminological domain tree; researching, inventorying, qualitative analysis, selection and acquisition of the resources to be handled in the consolidation process; adapting and updating the domain tree depending on the data selected; adapting consolidation objectives; preliminary classification of the entries according to the terminological tree.

- Stages of the consolidation process: Detection of entries/concepts appearing more than once (‘doubles’); merging/deleting doubles; revision and intralinguistic (source language), semantic and formal validation; revision and interlinguistic (target language(s) with respect to the source language), semantic and formal validation; adding information and/or fields; creating links between cards and the latest organization of data

- Checking terms are valid and up-to-date.


- Tools: There is no specific consolidation tool currently available on the market, the Interval project therefore has the development of such a tool as one of its aims. This tool must take into account problems of terminological format and compatibility between different systems.

As has been mentioned above, the flesh must be put on the bones of these initial guidelines at as early a stage as possible and the developed methodology applied within the framework of the subsequent project tasks.


In addition to the models and methodologies for the validation of terminology, the Interval project is also to create two validated databases; one in each of the target domains: Finance and telecommunications. In order to keep to the validation methodology developed, and to use existing data as a starting point, we have created an inventory of available terminological resources as part of task T03.

This inventory was targeted on resources available in all 11 official languages of the EU, with particular emphasis on recently created resources, ie. those published after 1985. Catalan (the language of one of the partners) and other supplementary languages present in the resources have also been included in the census.

The results of the inventory presented below cover 464 resources in the two target domains. We have identified a large number of monoligual and bilingual resources (almost 65%) compared with the number of multilingual resources.

The inventory also includes a large number of resources which are currently available on the market. It has turned out to be quite difficult to obtain census information concerning what is generally referred to as ‘grey terminology’, ie. ‘in-house’ terminology which many organisations and companies still consider -often out of concern for the possible risks - to be confidential. Thanks to established contacts we have been able to detect the presence of ‘grey terminology’, but, unfortunately, it has not been possible to include it in the survey on account of the requirement for confidentiality.

These inventoried resources are now the object of a qualitative analysis as part of WP1, and this will make it possible to select the resources which are genuinely usable in the project. Moreover, WP2 will make it possible to progress to the stage of acquiring those selected resources that are available.



INTERVAL Task T04 aims to complement the findings of POINTER on legal questions relating to the protection of terminological work by providing solutions to the problems posed by market realities.

Practice has shown that there is no way of estimating the return on an investment in developing terminological systems (contents, forms of exploitation and diffusion).

This study also states clearly the recommendations made whilst preparing WP2 concerning the specific legal problems relating to the acquisition of terminological works.

7.4.1Copyright and contracts

7.4.1.1Comparison of different contracts according to the country and type of legal protection

The different types of contract are related to the copyright applicable to different uses:

· Literary work authorship contract.

· Contract for the translation of a literary work.

· Contract for authorship of a technical work.

· Contract for the translation of a technical work.

· Contract for authorship of a dictionary or terminological work.

- Translation dictionary.

- Dictionary of definitions.

- Mixed dictionary.

7.4.1.2Examination of legal texts on the subject of copyright

· Certain company names ®· Patents ®· Trade-marks ™· Literary or technical works in one or more languages ©7

7 Only works including a novel or original element may be protected by copyright


Whether it is the case of an idea, a concept, a theory, a translation or adaptation, a compiled list of existing words or a list of neologisms, it is always the innovative or original element which prevails. However, it is obvious that any terminological resource creation work draws upon the everyday vocabulary of a language for words with which to designate new concepts (eg. mouse in computer vocabulary) and must also take lexicography into account.

It should be noted that in competitive sectors, both in lexicography and terminology, the legal basis of plagiarism in France places the emphasis on resemblance rather than difference, whereas in the Anglo-Saxon countries the opposite approach tends to be adopted.

Although, in reality what looks more like a Petit Robert than a Petit Larousse or a Hachette? Indeed, it is far from easy to come up with new definitions for long established concepts which belong to the public domain.

7.4.1.3Bilingual and Multilingual Dictionaries (Translation Dictionaries)

A preliminary finding is that the degree of convergence of terms between a number of dictionaries dealing with the same domain is significant8.

If you compare two translation dictionaries dealing with the same subject (information technology, for example) the degree of similarity is very high. Plagiarism aside, there is a very high likelihood that the information will be identical in 70 or 80% of cases. Indeed, if these dictionaries were to differ substantially, two translations of the same text could also be expected to be very different.

For this reason the intellectual property rights of the author can only be brought to bear upon the original part of the work and not on its compilation, which may be assimilated to the public domain. It is the definitions, synonyms, examples, new terms (neologisms) and explanations which differentiate works from one another. Only this part creates new value, the rest can be found elsewhere.

Terminology must contain a significant amount of information in order to be able to benefit from effective legal protection of the intellectual property rights.

The different recommendations on the subject of intellectual property rights rest upon two types of contract:

· Authorship contract governed by the Law of Copyright of March 1957 (France), which offers authors protection for any original work.

· Licence contract ceding copyright to another publisher.

By extension these same contracts also govern databases, drawing support from contractual recommendations, depending on the way in which they are to be used, by whom and in what format.

8 Etude des degrés de convergence entre dictionnaires, Etude statistique, domaine : informatique . C.R.A.I.E (CFTTR) - Université de Rennes II, 1993.



INTERVAL working methods and tools deserve the broadest possible distribution. The dissemination plan has therefore been designed to promote awareness of the indispensable nature of terminology validation, to keep project partners informed, to collect and process useful information from players outside the consortium, and to publicise and distribute the results of the project.

We distinguish between two types of information: outgoing information and incoming information. Outgoing information is sent to outside players by the Consortium. It consists of a presentation of the INTERVAL project, progress reports and demonstration versions. Incoming information is that received by the Consortium, in particular the ongoing consultation of members of the User Club.

The public targeted by these dissemination activities consists of public and private sector users, including those working in the language industry, training centres, universities, associations (in particular participants in European multilingual projects), owners of terminological sources, and terminology experts. The targets are:

· European and world-wide terminology publications,

· events in the world of terminology (seminars, congresses, exhibitions, etc.),

· training centres (schools, institutes, universities, etc.),

· other players in the field of terminology (producers, users, teachers, etc.).

As far as the means of dissemination are concerned, the range of media used is vast: ranging from the traditional (paper) to the most recent (Internet), and including computer-aided techniques.

The outgoing means of dissemination are divided into direct (project presentation brochure, Newsletter, Power Point presentation of the project, INTERVAL poster and specialist publications) and indirect (presentation of the project to terminology students at training centres, information supplied to the general public and professionals on progress on the project).

Incoming information is essentially gathered via the Internet forum and is used to gauge the impact and success of the project.

The INTERVAL Newsletter will evolve into one of the principal means of dissemination. Written and edited by members of the Consortium, it will be available on paper and over the Internet. It will contain information concerning progress on the project and news about events and project stages to come.

terms of reference - computing.surrey.ac.uk€¦ · web viewproject ref. no. le2-4002 project...

Documents