3. Pilot Feedback - Long [WATERVERSE Project Pilots]: Eingabe #14

Eingabennummer: 14
Eingaben-ID: 386
UUID der Webformular-Eingabe: 8986a31f-abdf-4b73-83f2-325831897826

Erstellt: Fr., 01.03.2024 - 12:48
Abgeschlossen: Fr., 01.03.2024 - 12:50
Geändert: Mo., 15.04.2024 - 20:47

Remote-IP-Adresse: 89.205.137.184
Erstellt von: Gast
Sprache: English

Ist Entwurf: Nein
Aktuelle Seite: Vollständig
I have read the above statements and I hereby provided my explicit consent. Ja
[Optional] I agree that my personal data can be used for contacting me in the context of inviting me in future events of interest, related to the WATERVERSE. Ja
Full name: Dave Ebbelaar
Date of consent: Mi., 02/28/2024 - 00:00
Pilot site/country Netherlands
I participate in this pilot exercise with the role: IT personnel at the water organisation
Affiliated Organisation PWN
Type of affiliated organisation: Water utility
Email [optional]:
Telephone [optional]:
The functionality of the tool with regards to the user requirements is complete. 4
The implementation of data and information transfers through the interface functions is correct. 4
Low frequency of failures to exchange data between the component and other involved components/tools. 4
No deviation between the actual and reasonably expected results. 4
Low frequency of encountering inaccurate results/behaviour. 4
functional_suitability_average 4
The component/tool was operational and available when required for use. 4
When a failure occurred, no much time was required before gradual start-up of the component/tool. 4
Sufficient capability of the involved functionality in restoring itself after an abnormal event or at request. 4
reliability_average 4
I am able to recognise whether the component/tool is appropriate for fulfilling my requirements. 4
The component/tool has sufficient attractiveness of the user interface. 4
A sufficiently high proportion of the user interface elements could be customised to my satisfaction. 2
The component/tool offered sufficient support in avoiding errors when using its functionality. 2
usability_average 3
Satisfactory response time of the functionality. 4
Throughput of the operations close to the specified requirements. 4
Proper utilisation of memory resources (did you, for example, encounter “low memory” problems?). 4
Ability for the system to remain operational when pushed to its limits in terms of number of users, frequency of requests, etc. 3
performance_efficiency_average 4
maintainability_average 0
portability_average 0
Sufficient use of standard application programming interfaces. 4
Sufficient openness and ease of use of the interfaces. 4
compatibility_average 4
The software ensures that only authorised individuals have access to sensitive data. 3
The software prevents unauthorised access or modification of data, ensuring data accuracy and consistency. 3
The software provides evidence of actions or events, making it difficult for involved parties to deny their involvement. 3
The software traces actions and activities to specific entities, ensuring clear accountability. 4
The software verifies and ensures the true identity of subjects or resources within the system. 4
security_average 3

Funding Support Agencies

EU funding support flag
EU structural funds flag
flag of Republic of Cyprus
CY structural funds
CY Research and Innovation Foundation