Cultural Heritage in REGional NETworks REGNET Status of WP 2 / WP 3 Extended Project Management Group Meeting 2002-06-24

Cultural Heritage in REGional NETworksCultural Heritage in REGional NETworks

REGNETREGNET

Status of WP 2 / WP 3

Extended Project Management Group Meeting 2002-06-24

June 2002

2

REGNET Status of work in WP 2 /3 (IMAC)

Status of WP 2 - Preparation of content (WP 2.1)Status of WP 2 - Preparation of content (WP 2.1)

2.1.1 Cataloguing & digitising

• Cataloguing of objects• Digitising of objects• Data input/upload

Sub tasks in WP 2.1 Content Preparation

2.1.2 Thematic content production

• Theme structures• Fragments linked to themes• Thematic views for navigation

Ongoing task of all content providers

Using existing systemsand/or (offline) data entrytools

Preparation for the REGNET demonstrator, Set-up of individual databases for each partner.

Progress: Newversion of templates & possibilitiesto convert data (Word,Excel to REGNET DTD)

Status WP 2.1 June 2002

June 2002

3



1. Available Content (prepared offline)Status WP 2.1 June 2002

Collections

Object data: Word/Excel (XML),XML, Own databases (Access etc.)

Images related to objects (Tiff,Jpeg)

Themes(thematic texts)

E. g. texts regional aspects ofart (styles etc.) (17)

Texts related to other topics: Saints,Leather, Gilt Leather, Measuring, Masks & Amulets, Linnaeus, Habsburg/Elisabeth, Early Renaissance

Shop Items

Tour d’Horizon: Texts, objectdata and images

Sellable (art) objects with basicdescription & prices

Museum shop items

Some of it only in partner‘s nativelanguage

June 2002

4



1. Available Content (prepared offline)(continuation)


Profiles

Collection Profile (withsome illustrating images

Company Profile (withsome illustrating images

Artists

Artists CVs (native language& english)

Selection of works (withimages, prices, copyright holder)

Next Steps

(Conversion)

Upload to the system

Linkage/relations

“Online editing”

Usage for the portal

Detailed informationin Sofia (conversion,

status), content collection plan

Events

Description of work (in nativelanguage and english)

Example(s) for an exhibitioninformation (text/images)

Will be quantified during the meeting (status reports)!

June 2002

5



2. Set-up of databases (preparationof the demonstrator) - online

Databases for object data/images:


www.digipark.at/xxx

login: regnet password: user001

Next Steps

Finalising concept for testing

Content criteria definition

Content/database tests

Discussion about criteria and procedures in Sofia!

Poster Collection 22.985 object records withimages (poster)

ONB PictureArchive (cataloguecards)

A set of cataloguecards: Leit- and Stückkarten.Special: order functionalities

KVA 6807 records: object data,bibliographic data.

Different fields & functions

DorfmuseumFeldbrunnen

1052 records: object data(without images)

MECH 116 records: object data(internal database)

June 2002

6



3. Theme Input (thematic texts) Status WP 2.1 June 2002

www.digipark.at/themes

login: regnet password: user001

Next Steps

Validation of fields (themes)

Upload of available texts

Use the template!

Linkage

Agreement on fields. Further technical solutions for the linkage problem in Sofia!?

4. Associations

Objectdata

Themes

Image

At present: Tool in preparationfor the creation of associations using the internal REGNET ID

Themes defined as one object type. Template available (Fragment template) (and should be used for the input! AIT uploaded a part of the files available.

June 2002

7



5. New object types for the PortalNext Steps

Discussion of fields

Content for the portal

Internationalization aspects

Publishing concept

Data input

Content collection plan for portal content (new object types and general texts) to be generated in Sofia.

All data should be stored on the TeXtML-Server. New object types were introduced in Graz. Templates are available for

- News/Newsletter

- Collection

- Profile

- Address

- Events

- Links

- Vocabulary

What content should bemade available? In which language(s)? Who is responsible?

www.digipark.at/rndatainput/ login: regnet password: member

June 2002

8


Status of WP 2 - Market preparation (WP 2.5)Status of WP 2 - Market preparation (WP 2.5)

Status of work - Current Agenda

1. Market Description: General Trends2. Qualitative Market Analysis 3. Quantitative Market Analysis for selected Countries4. Competitor Analysis5. General Success Factors for the RegNet- System on the Cultural Market6. Definition of RegNet Features and USP

June 2002

9



Status of work - Current Agenda

7. Definition of Organisational Structure, Technical and Business Infrastructure, Service Level, Service Portfolio and Pricing Structure and General Business Model8. Definition of General Marketing Strategies and Marketing Policies applicable for all CSC (Product, Price, Distribution, Communication & Online Marketing)9. Development of a Business Plan for each Regional CSC

June 2002

10



10. Development of a Marketing Concept for each Targeted Country Market & Segment (Suisse as an Example)11. Development of overall Marketing Instruments (Guided Tours, Prospectus, Direct Mail, Cooperation Recommendations with Associations, Regional Authorities etc.)12. Definition of a Marketing Concept to Communicate to Relevant Segments of the Society (Tourism & Leisure, Education, News Industries etc.)13. Definition of a Marketing Controlling Concept

June 2002

11


WP 3 Validation and PreparationWP 3 Validation and Preparation

Overview of tasks in WP 3

Deliverable 8:

Prototype:The REGNET-

System: Version 2

Task Briefs

T 3.1Validation of the

REGNET demonstrator

Responsible: IMAC

Interim Report IR 3.1Methodology of the validation process, test materials

Edited by IMACDue by:

2002-06-30

Deliverable D7:

Technical Report: ”Validation of the REGNET system

operation & Preparation of the

REGNET - Demonstration

Phase"

Compiled & Edited by IMAC

Due by2002-06-30

T 3.2Preparation of the

Demonstration Phase

Responsible: VALT

T 3.3Implementation of

version 2 of the REGNET system

Responsible: ZEUS

Interim Report IR 3.2Set up of legal framework, technical infrastructure, ...

Edited by VALTDue by:

2002-06-30

Interim Report IR 3.3Edited by VALT

Due by:2002-06-30

June 2002

12


WP 3 Validation and PreparationWP 3 Validation and Preparation

Expected results - A summary and critical view

System functions and business processes fulfill needs of user

Necessary infrastructure is set up and working properlyContent providers could provide access to their goods

Service access points are prepared

Staff has been trained

System is finalised

= > Working program for Sofia: Find solutions

June 2002

13


Next PhaseBasis for the demonstration phase: a functional and useable system!

A prooved methodology for the testing also outside the consortium.

Status of WP 3 - Validation of the REGNET-Status of WP 3 - Validation of the REGNET-Demonstrator (3.1)Demonstrator (3.1)

Overview of tasks in WP 3.1

Validate the system (internal)

To ensure that the system meets (or even exceeds) the expectations of: project partners, end users, EC

• Develop methodology• Define goals• Define tools• Carry out tests• Collect feedback (reporting)• Define (further) requirements

• improve functionalities • external software

Sofia:

Finalisation

Sofia:Initial tests

June 2002

14



Methodology for validation

UsabilityUsabilityFunctionalityFunctionality

Tasks

ContentContent PerformancePerformance

Does it workas promised?

Does it workas promised?

Schedule Reporting procedures

UserExperts Experts

Can the (end)user work withthe system?

Can the (end)user work withthe system?

Does thecontent meetexpectations?

Does thecontent meetexpectations?

Does it deliver in time, withoutcracking underheavy load?

Does it deliver in time, withoutcracking underheavy load?

Test based onfunctional requirements

Test based onfunctional requirements

User exercises,card sorting,heuristics

User exercises,card sorting,heuristics

Online testsagainst defined quality criteria

Online testsagainst defined quality criteria

Load and stress tests

Load and stress tests

What?

Why?

How?

File: Validation concept=> IR 3.1 (End of June)

June 2002

15



Functional Tests

Functional tests are based on use cases. The goals of these tests are to verify: Proper data acceptance, processing, retrieval, navigation etc.. Goals are not to define additional requirements(=> usability tests, task-oriented)

All partners need to test all use cases and all exceptions (invalid data input, left out mandatory fields etc.)! Assignment of test cases


Test cases for data generation, search & retrieval completed (72)

High level test cases for the other components

Draft for reporting workflow and forms

In Sofia:

- Agreement on test start- Agreement on test cases- Agreement on reporting workflow- Assignment of tasks & scheduling

Validation Components (1)

Estimation: 10 cases per day (testing, reporting, „controlling“), 6 days for the first 72 cases

June 2002

16



Usability Tests

Goal: Assure the usability of the system: - ease of learning - efficienttask completion - minimal error rate -high user satisfaction.

Results: detailed catalogue of recommendations to enhance the user interface (colours, fonts, lay-out etc.), the navigational structure, workflows within functionalities, wording etc.

Validation components (2)

Heuristic TestsTests by experts according to a well defined usability criteria catalogue (3 tests/3 partners)

User Tests

(End) Users will get „tasks“ to perform, their bevahiour will be monitored, they will be interviewed to capture their experience with the system (2 tests per content partner)

„Extra“: Card Sorting

Task-oriented approach: what do we want the system to support?

Test types

June 2002

17



Card Sorting


Idea: Validate administrative view and enduser view on the basis of the implemented portal structure, define the final structure of the website(3 tests per partner)

Could be demonstrated in Sofia and integrated in the whole validation concept

Experimental approach for the validation of the information architecture (portal)

Test „environment“:

IBMs Usort / EZCalc software package

http://www-3.ibm.com/ibm/easy/eou_ext.nsf/Publish/410

User guide for the program alreadyprepared.

?








June 2002

18



Validation components (2)


Usability tests: questionnaire with tasks (examples)

Heuristic: Draft for a catalogue of test criteria todetermine the usability / lacks of usability

Card Sorting: Program to support testing, guidelines for the system

In Sofia:

- Agreement on usability criteria - whatis important for the REGNET project?

- Agreement on test efforts (numberof persons per partner)

- Define user groups (draft available)

- Finalise questionnaires/tasks- Assignment of tasks & scheduling

Next: Preparation of testing material,translation, testing (within theconsortium) & implementation

June 2002

19



Content (Quality) TestsGoal: Assure that the “content” is“well-prepared” and that it meets the quality expectations (each content partner).


Content Integrity Check: Ensure that the data is entered (converted / uploaded) and presented correctly.Test of own databases/applications

Content Quality Check: Check of content in the system compared to quality criteria. E. g. content readable and correct, picture size, copyright ...

Content Quality Checks

- Object-oriented (object data,thematic texts ...)

- Page-oriented (portal!)

Content Integrity Checks

Data Input = Data Output ?

June 2002

20





Next: Test of databases, test content!

Draft for content quality criteria (texts, pictures, links, copyright issues)

Forms for content quality checks (reporting per object)

In Sofia:

- Discussion about “quality”

- What standard should be reached?

- How much content should be checked?

- Which content should be checked?

- Discussion about quality criteria

- What should be tested?

- (Short) introduction to forms for reporting

- Scheduling

June 2002

21



Performance Tests

Goals: 1. Measure and evaluate the performance behaviours and ability(find existing bottlenecks, verify current system capacity, verify scalability of the system, verify performance requirements, determine optimal hardware / application configuration).2. Determine and ensure that system functions are properly beyond the expected maximum workload.


Proposal for performancerequirements

Proposal for the technicalsupport of the tests (jmeter)

High-level test scenario definition

In Sofia:

- Agreement on failure/pass criteria

- Assignment of tasks and scheduling


Task for the technical people. To be discussed during the group meeting of the technical group!?

June 2002

22


Summary: Working plan for the meetingSummary: Working plan for the meeting

Validation: Introduction of „tools“ for testing (forms, questionnaires, software tools), agreement on test criteria, task assignment and scheduling. Definition of next steps.

Validation: Introduction of „tools“ for testing (forms, questionnaires, software tools), agreement on test criteria, task assignment and scheduling. Definition of next steps.

Preparation of data: Discussing and solving open issues regarding the data entry and data preparation for the REGNET demonstrator. Updated view of the data available (status reporting).

Preparation of data: Discussing and solving open issues regarding the data entry and data preparation for the REGNET demonstrator. Updated view of the data available (status reporting).

(Further) Content Collection Discussion the necessity of further content (for the portal), responsibilities and content collection plan. Internationalization aspects.

(Further) Content Collection Discussion the necessity of further content (for the portal), responsibilities and content collection plan. Internationalization aspects.

Discussion & workinggroups (Tuesday)

Finalising concept and tools. Starting point for the validation. First tests? Feedback?

Presentations & discussion (Monday)

Preparation of Review Meeting and next report (2)

June 2002

23


Summary: Open / Important IssuesSummary: Open / Important Issues

Tools:

Get an overview about available tools. Decision aboutalternatives if tools are not available or practicable.

Technical integration level of the whole system.

Content integration level in terms of retrieving several items from different content providers via one search action.

Integration of Topic Maps in the storage and navigation structures.

Multilingual structures on all levels.

Start of validation: Realistic assumption for the start of validation => Testable state? Time left for testing?

Reporting and Implementation: How to? Scheduling!

Preparation of demonstration phase

Documents

Cultural Heritage in REGional NETworks REGNET Status of WP 2 / WP 3 Extended Project Management Group Meeting 2002-06-24