QVIZ

1. QVIZ Query and context based visualization of time-spatial cultural dynamics

2. Summary of QVIZ Patrik Svensson Fredrik Palm Umeå University (UMU)

3. Outline of the presentation • Summary of QVIZ general results • Examples of innovation • QVIZ integrated software platform • Data models of integration • Reports and deliverables

4. General objective: Enhance access to Archival/Cultural Heritage resources by subscribers such as students, researchers, local historians and professional archival users. Rather than answering full text multilingual queries, multilingualism will be addressed at the knowledge level. Linking querying and visualization in a community knowledge building process will motivate European citizens to form communities that enhance access to and usage of archives. QVIZ has delivered enhanced and contextualized access using visualization of time, space and community activities. QVIZ has involved two national archives using an integrated resource model based on ISDA(G) and the Administrative unit ontology. QVIZ has enabled wider usage of archival resources through the integration of a collaborative knowledge building process. The QVIZ approach has also created a need for sophisticated knowledge services within the archival sector. Improved access to European CulturealHeritage Summary of QVIZ

5. QVIZ – a model for accessing European archives • Access to 75,646 archival volumes. • Between 16 and 18 million digital images. • 73,030 administrative units linked by 218,518 relationships. • The administrative ontology covers the whole of Europe – provides access point to archives across Europe. • Multilateral user to user collaboration.

6. Examples of innovations • Visualization of archival resource context using names, relations, time and location of administrative units. • The context of archival resources does not need to follow today’s borders. • Integrating user activities and knowledge building processes. • Dynamic and responsive user interfaces. • Unified resource model adopting ISDA(G) enables cross-border access to administrative units (present and historical). • ”Where and When” overcomes the initial barrier when searching and using archival resources.

7. QVIZ integrated platform

8. Integrating models of archival resources

9. Administrative units

10. User domain content model

11. QVIZ scientific and technical documentation D.2.1 State of the Art D.3.1 Specification of Access Methodologies for Selected User Scenarios D.3.2 Administrative Ontology (Schema) D.3.3 Ontology for Domain (Schema) D.3.4 Knowledge Content Model (KCO) D.4.1.3 System Specification and Requirement Report D.5.2 Toolkit Architecture Report Version 2 D.6.4.2b Prototype 2b D.7.3 Assessment Methodology and User Scenario Test Plan Final D.7.1.2 Software Validation Online Diary and Final Validation Report D.7.4 Evaluation Report of Case Study D.8.1.2 Exploitation Plan TIP and IPR-plan final D.8.2 Dissemination Plan

12. Demo session Linda Lindgren Umeå University (UMU)

13. QVIZ symposium Patrik Svensson Umeå University (UMU)

14. Formal part of the presentation Patrik Svensson Fredrik Palm Umeå University (UMU)

15. Outline of the presentation • QVIZ consortium • QVIZ collaboration, meetings and communication • Review actions • Efforts and financial information

16. UoP Research in administrative units ontology Design and implementation of administrative ontology Leader of WP 3 – Knowledge and analysis SNA Expert in usage of archival and cultural heritage content Integrator of QVIZ-service in SNA’s content portals Leader for WP2 & 8 – Requirements & Exploitation and dissemination NAE Pedagogical expert in archival and cultural heritage content Integrator of QVIZ –service in SNA’s content portals Leader of WP 7 – Validation UMU Technical coordination across work packages Development and integration of tools for dynamic queries and social bookmarking. Software validation Dissemination and exploitation Leader of WP 1 – Management TID Technical expertise in E-services development and documentation Business and license handling relevant to exploitation plans Leader of WP 4 – Technical specification SRFG Collaborative social software for knowledge building Ontology schema design Leader of WP 5 – Core component implementation REGIO Development of time-spatial technological components using administrative ontology and historical maps. Internet map servers and development of web mapping software Leader of WP 6 – Contextualisation and visualisation implementation QVIZ consortium

18. QVIZ collaboration • Regular PMT-meetings for coordination of shared effort across work packages. • Physical consortium meetings and workshops. • Steering groups meetings.

19. A PMT-meeting (13/2/2008) • Acute issues • Review (Fredrik 5 min) • The review have been set for the 16th to the 20th of June. This date has been decided upon by the project officer. All partners need to have one representative present. Cost can be brought up during the 45 days after the project has ended. Considering that this review takes place after these 45 days Fredrik will check what kind of cost that can be taken into account. • WP 3 (Fredrik 5 min) • Fredrik reported in Humphrey’s stead that UoP has delivered the data structure on administrative unit ontology and are now working on the Deliverable 3.2. • WP 5 & 6 (Bob 5 min) • Bob: Mostly bug fixing and improvements to the ontology. And of course work on the user manual. The user manual is supposed to be finished by the 15th of February. • Fredrik: Map and FB are mostly stable. Work will be performed on completing the Estonian administrative units. Mikael will be responsible for the Toolkit report and will receive assistance and back up from Laura. This report needs to obtain a high quality since it will be very important and have many uses.

20. PMT-meeting continued • WP 7 (Tõnis 5 min) • Mostly functionality testing has been performed on the Map and Faceted Browser and bugs have been reported. The CET will have a new version today and the testing on this will be commenced. Linda is working on the D 7.1.2 and it will be finished shortly. Furthermore, preparations and test case drafts are being produced for the usability test. The code freeze will give the testers the opportunity to decide which version to test usability on. • WP 8 (Fredrik and Johan 5 min) • Johan: Exploitation draft is being updated. Any feedback on the version that is found on the wiki must be commented in writing and emailed to Peder and Johan by this Friday (February 15th)! Specifically Laura’s table need to be commented, it is found within the appendix. An update of this table will be put up under work in progress by Johan. • The 19th of February; Partners own exploitation expectations must be specified and handed in to Peder and Johan; Requirements for the archives to be able to join must be updated (Paula and Mårten); List of Content Providers made by Tõnis; More input on contacts taken; All this information needs to be emailed to Peder and Johan by the 19th of February!! • Fredrik: A meeting has taken place between Jill Cousin (EDL), Peder Andrén and Fredrik Palm. The outcome of that meeting was that QVIZ do have some potential for the European Archives and QVIZ will be invited to take part in a technical meeting round the 17th of March. Peder will handle the communication surrounding that meeting. Who will be invited from QVIZ will be reported later on. • Other issues • Symposium dates have been fixed, more information will be posted on the wiki during the day and some information can be found on the web. The commission has been informed of this symposium. All partners are to meet in Umeå some days before the symposium. • Next meeting • 27th of February at 13.30 CET.

21. A QVIZ consortium meeting 22nd of January 2008 at REGIO • 9 .00 Welcome - Fredrik Palm • 9.10 Walkthrough of the program - Mona Bonta Bergman • 9.20 Exploitation including product definition - Peder Andrén • 12.30-14.00 Lunch • 15.00 Dissemination - Mona Bonta Bergman • 16.30 Presentation of Wednesdays workshops Tõnis Türna and Fredrik Palm • 17.15-17.30 Short evaluation of the day- Fredrik Palm

22. A QVIZ-meeting continued 23rd of January 2008 • 9 .00 Workshop, Testing at NAE, Development at Regio. Tõnis Türna and Mikael Berglund • 12.30-14.00 Lunch • 13.30-17.30 Continue workshop • 19.00 Dinner 24th of January 2008 at REGIO • 9 .00 Introduction – Fredrik Palm • 9.10 Walkthrough of completed functions and feedback from testing activities- Mikael Berglund and Tõnis Türna • 10.00 Presentation of discussion topics - Fredrik Palm • 10.15 Smaller discussion groups • 12.30-14.00 Lunch • 14.00 Gather to present discussion result- Fredrik Palm • 15.15-15.30 Evaluation of the consortium meeting – Fredrik Palm

23. Example of steering group meeting

24. Example of QVIZ Workshop WS 2 Development, Mikael Berglund Objectives • Find the most important functionalities • Integrating points, 1) functionalities, 2) user interface • Improving the efficiency of the GUI • Common graphic profile Expected Results • Time plan for completely fixing the bugs for the most important functionalities. Preparation • Evaluate ranking made in D 4.1.3 System Specification and Requirement Report (pdf-file)

25. Review action #1 Integration: • Consortium partners created a single integrated scenario within WP2 and WP4. The single integrated scenario outlined the QVIZ-package describing the most prioritized achievable result. This was communicated and agreed in July/August 2007. • Single integrated scenarios and functionalities have been implemented for easy interaction with archival portals, and knowledge creation and searching. • Some previous scenarios, and functionalities were given lower priority, such as the Mobile scenario which was not consistent with the overall scenario. • The user manuals are public and include also a video tutorial for most relevant activities.

26. Review action #2 User involvement and validation: • The consortium defined the main target groups of QVIZ. Research and development addressed the need of these groups. These target groups where used for the case-study and usability testing. • Validation : • Functionality testing through explorative testing has been used to validate software quality. 20 test charters have been designed and tested. • Functionality testing have also given feedback about usability and information about compliance towards the specification in the D.4.1.3 • Dialogue with end user in various dissemination activities.

27. Review action #3 Exploitation and dissemination: • The draft of exploitation plan was delivered in November 2007 • Business or governance models have been established. There are plans up uptakes of somewhat modified parts of QVIZ by NAE, SNA, EUROPEANA and APE-net are discussing models of uptake of result, but only a tentative agreement has been made. • Efforts have been made both to maintain a high level of dissemination and to document these more extensively in relevant documents. Most relevant presentations and papers, and all public deliverables are now available on the QVIZ website

28. Review action #4 Quality of reports and research result • The reviewers requested the consortium to produce deliverables of more consistent quality. • UMU hired one additional communication manager to focus on quality assurance of reports, and allocated additional resources to achieve deliverables of consistently high quality.

30. Person month effort year 2 Explanatory reason for difference • Mobilizing integrative work after M12 Review – more person months were needed. • Umeå University intensified its effort in a major mobilization during the second year – thus strengthening the coordinator’s role in the project to achieve a high level of integration. • Personnel were recruited for technical coordination/integration, software validation, scientific quality assurance, dissemination, quality assurance of deliverables and exploitation. • REGIO, UMU and UoP did more person months than planned, primarily due to the integration work with UMU and also because it was not possible to recruit as skilled persons as needed, therefore less senior persons needed more time.

31. Comments on costs (draft) • QVIZ has used about 70 person months more than originally planned. We estimate that the cost will be as budgeted. • Travel costs were a bit higher for some partners, especially UMU, due to many persons involved and the exploitation, dissemination and integrative activities. • Given the complexity of this project the extra effort has been required to deliver the high quality work that the consortium has collaboratively delivered.

32. WP2 Requirements WP leader: Peder Andrén (SNA)

35. Principal results WP2: • Generally: The interpretation of project objectives to User Requirements, Business Requirements, Functional- and Non-functional Requirements • From User Groups, User Scenarios, Mock-ups to Use Cases • Business Requirements • Deliverables

36. Deliverables WP2: • State of the Art D2.1 Submission date: 30/09/2006 • System Specification and Requirement Report D4.1.3 Submission date: 29/10/2007

37. WP2 development: First year: • General User Scenarios, User Groups and Use Cases • Mock-ups and Story Boards • First phase Functional Requirement • Business Analysis • State of the Art Report D2.1 Second year: • Specification, prioritization, concretization and elaboration of Target User Groups, User Roles, Use Cases. Functional and Non-functional Requirements • Feeding the final results into the project via the System Specification and Requirement Report D4.1.3

38. Description of results Definition of requirements of QVIZ target groups: • Family history researchers – Search and cooperate • Students – Educational assignments, individual and in groups • Educators – Prepare and conduct comparative studies • Professionals (Authorities) – Search of specific information

39. Description of results

40. Description of results

41. Description of results QVIZ-UC60a: AU selection from Faceted Browser Ordinary sequence: 1. "Map" zooms onto the selected Administrative Unit. The Administrative Unit is drawn on the layer "SELECTED" highlighted with a red border. 2. "Faceted Browser" highlights the selected Administrative Unit. 3. "Result List" displays web links to archival resources connected to the selected Administrative Unit. "Directly related resources" are displayed first, "Indirectly related resources" second. 4. "Result List" will for every archival resource display a web link to display social bookmarks for that particular archival resource. 5. "CONTEXT" shows the following information: Administrative Unit name, Administrative Unit minimum creation date, Administrative Unit maximum abolition date, 6. Chronological list of Administrative Unit polygons (with Administrative Unit name, Administrative Unit creation date, Administrative Unit abolition date). 7. "TIME-WINDOW" does not change. 8. "TIME-SLIDER" moves to the start (or end) of the Administrative Unit time period depending on the position of the "TIME-WINDOW". That is because the "TIME-SLIDER" has to fall into the period defined by "TIME-WINDOW".

42. Description of WP2 results: The work in WP2 laid the foundation for the successful result of the project. Among the success factors were: • The time taken for a knowledge building process within the Consortium • The non-wavering focus on USER requirement – not on institutional requirements

43. Description of WP2 results: Drawing on the result of: • The collected experience from SNA and NAE on user needs • Existing surveys and questionnaires from partner archives • Analyses of the extensive e-mail communication between the service department of the partner archives • Previous national projects

44. Description of WP2 results: • The Requirements aimed the project result not only towards a set of recommendations, a prototype or a proof of concept, but for an actually working system

45. Description of WP2 results: QVIZ an Integrated Distributed System • A strong requirement for a distributed system Business Model • QVIZ handle paid content • A market analysis: Digital archives information – a global business on the internet • From a DCM-Business model in WP2 to a Governance model in WP8 • Marketing a toolkit or marketing of an integrated system – or both

47. WP3Knowledge and Analysis WP Leader: Humphrey Southall (UoP)

50. Principal results: • Selection of archival documents • ISDA(G) resources from NAE and SNA totaling 75,646 volumes • Development of data model for Administrative Unit Ontology • Pioneering hybrid ontology/GIS • 73,030 administrative units • 218,518 relationships between them • 75,986 boundary polygons • Definition of domain ontology • Handling the user content and relations to archival resources • Definition of Knowledge Content Object • Enabling export of content object in innovative facet encapsulating