2015-01-13 11:25:06 +01:00
|
|
|
% The main file for developing the proposal.
|
|
|
|
% Variants with different class options are
|
|
|
|
% - submit.tex (no draft stuff, no ednotes, no revision information)
|
|
|
|
% - public.tex (like submit.tex, but no financials either)
|
|
|
|
\providecommand{\classoptions}{,keys} % to be overwritten in variants
|
|
|
|
\documentclass[noworkareas,deliverables,gitinfo,propB\classoptions]{euproposal}
|
2014-02-15 12:01:14 +01:00
|
|
|
%\usepackage[T1]{fontenc}
|
|
|
|
%\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
|
2016-01-08 12:58:03 +01:00
|
|
|
%\addbibresource{../lib/dummy}
|
2014-02-15 12:01:14 +01:00
|
|
|
\input{../lib/WApersons}% Some sections of the included files depend on this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
\begin{document}
|
|
|
|
\begin{center}\color{red}\huge
|
|
|
|
This mock proposal is just an example for \texttt{euproposal.cls} it reflects the ICT
|
|
|
|
template of May 2011
|
|
|
|
\end{center}
|
|
|
|
\begin{proposal}[site=jacu,jacuRM=36,
|
|
|
|
site=efo,efoRM=36,
|
|
|
|
site=bar,barRM=36,
|
|
|
|
site=baz,bazRM=36,
|
|
|
|
coordinator=miko,
|
|
|
|
acronym={iPoWr},
|
|
|
|
acrolong={\underline{I}ntelligent} {\underline{P}r\underline{o}sal} {\underline{Wr}iting},
|
|
|
|
title=\pn: \protect\pnlong,
|
|
|
|
callname = ICT Call 1,
|
|
|
|
callid = FP7-???-200?-?,
|
|
|
|
instrument= Small or Medium-Scale Focused Research Project (STREP),
|
|
|
|
challengeid = 4,
|
|
|
|
challenge = ICT for EU Proposals,
|
|
|
|
objectiveid={ICT-2012.4.4},
|
|
|
|
objective = Technology-enhanced Documents,
|
|
|
|
outcomeid = b1,
|
|
|
|
outcome = {More time for Research, not Proposal writing},
|
|
|
|
coordinator=miko,
|
|
|
|
months=24,
|
|
|
|
compactht]
|
|
|
|
\begin{abstract}
|
|
|
|
Writing grant proposals is a collaborative effort that requires the integration of
|
|
|
|
contributions from many individuals. The use of an ASCII-based format like {\LaTeX}
|
|
|
|
allows to coordinate the process via a source code control system like
|
|
|
|
{\textsc{Subversion}}, allowing the proposal writing team to concentrate on the contents
|
|
|
|
rather than the mechanics of wrangling with text fragments and revisions.
|
|
|
|
\end{abstract}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
\tableofcontents
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
\begin{todo}{from the proposal template}
|
|
|
|
Recommended length for the whole part B: 50--60 pages (including tables, references,
|
|
|
|
etc.)
|
|
|
|
\end{todo}
|
|
|
|
\include{quality}\newpage
|
|
|
|
\include{implementation}\newpage
|
|
|
|
\include{impact}\newpage
|
|
|
|
\include{issues}
|
|
|
|
\end{proposal}
|
|
|
|
\end{document}
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%%% Local Variables:
|
|
|
|
%%% mode: LaTeX
|
|
|
|
%%% TeX-master: t
|
|
|
|
%%% End:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
% LocalWords: efo efoRM baz bazRM miko acrolong ntelligent iting pn pnlong
|
|
|
|
% LocalWords: textsc newpage compactht
|