ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES
DELACOMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEEDES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM(82)191
Vol.1982/0060

Disclaimer
Conformément aurèglement(CEE,Euratom)n°354/83duConseildu1erfévrier1983
concernantl'ouvertureaupublicdesarchiveshistoriquesdelaCommunauté économique
européenne etdelaCommunauté européenne del'énergieatomique(JOL43du15.2.1983,
p.1),telquemodifiéparlerèglement(CE,Euratom)n°1700/2003du22septembre2003
(JOL243du27.9.2003,p.1),cedossierestouvertaupublic.Lecaséchéant,lesdocuments
classifiésprésentsdanscedossierontétédéclassifiés conformément àl'article5dudit
règlement.
Inaccordance withCouncilRegulation(EEC,Euratom)No354/83of1February1983
concerningtheopeningtothepublicofthehistoricalarchivesoftheEuropeanEconomic
Community andtheEuropeanAtomicEnergyCommunity (OJL43,15.2.1983,p.1),as
amendedbyRegulation(EC,Euratom)No1700/2003of22September2003(OJL243,
27.9.2003,p.1),thisfileisopentothepublic.Wherenecessary,classifieddocuments inthis
filehavebeendeclassified inconformitywithArticle5oftheaforementioned regulation.
InÜbereinstimmung mitderVerordnung(EWG,Euratom)Nr.354/83desRatesvom1.
Februar1983überdieFreigabederhistorischen ArchivederEuropäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft undderEuropäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI.L43vom15.2.1983,
S.1),geändertdurchdieVerordnung (EG,Euratom)Nr.1700/2003vom22.September2003
(ABI.L243vom27.9.2003,S.1),istdieseDateiderÖffentlichkeit zugänglich.Soweit
erforderlich,wurdendieVerschlusssachen indieserDateiinÜbereinstimmung mitArtikel5
dergenanntenVerordnungfreigegeben.

COMMISSION
OFTHE
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIESBrussels,„...15April1982
FOROFFICIAL USEONLY
GeneralSecretariat
Proposalfora
COUNCIL DECISION
offeringsupportundertheCommunitysupportmechanismin
thefieldofdata-processing underCouncilRegulation
(EEC)No1996/79toBurovoorSysteemontwikkeling ofUtrecht
andChristianRovsingofCopenhagen
(submittedtotheCouncilbytheCommission )
C0M(82)191final

EXPOSE DES MOTIFS
Introduction
1.Council Regulation (EEC )No.1996 /79establishing aCommunity support
mechanism inthe field ofdata processing provides for theCommission
toexecute themechanism ,and totake theDecisions necessary to
support projects once theAdvisory Committee for theManagement and
Coordination ofData Processing Programmes ,set upbyDecisi i
79/784/EEC ,hasgiven afavourable opinion .TheRegulation goes onto
provide (inArticle 8)that ,when theAdvisory Committee does notgive
afavourable opinion ,bythe qualified majority that islaid down ,the
Commission shall submit adraft Decision totheCouncil without delay .
2.During the last week ofAugust 1981 theCommission submitted tothe
Advisory Committee 22proposals forCommunity support -for 22projects .
Atitsmeeting on13th and 14th October the Committee gave afavourable
opinion bytherequired qualified majority on18ofthese 22,and
agreed todeal with 2oftheother 4atalater date .Thedraft
Decision attached concerns one ofthe remaining 2projects ,and issu-
mitted inaccordance with Article 8oftheRegulation
The Proposal ,
3.Theproposal was for adevelopment project formultilingual facilo .t.-s
for videotex information distribution systems from the Euro voor
Systeemontwikkeling ,Utrecht ,incollaboration with Christian RO-JS in-
International A/SofCopenhagen .They asked for ap,rant ofthe maxi •
of100%ofthe cost ofthe feasibility phase oftheproject ,estir -
at92.Q00ECU ,and aloan of1.856.500 ,or50%ofthecost ofthe
development phase .TheCommission hadcounter proposed agrant for 1c?
feasibility phase tobefollowed byapilot project forthecrucie 1
element oftheproject (thedevelopment ofthefinal fully automat :
translation stage ofthesystem )atanoverall cost of298.785 ECU ,
arguing that ifthis crucial element were proved ,thefull development
project should then befinancable from theprivate sector alone without
theineed forfurther public aid (inother words would nolonger then
conform tocriterion 2.1.3 ofthe mechanism -Council Decision
79/783/EEC).Theproposers had indicated that they would accept such
acounter proposal .

Thedevelopment oftheuseofvideotex systems toprovide Community
wide information services from databases tothegeneral public is
inevitably hampered byourusing many languages .Adatabase in,say ,
English isonly ofimmediate use tothose v/hounderstand English ;it
has tobefirst translated into other languages ,and then bemaintained
inthese other languages ,ifitistobegenerally available innon
English-speaking member states -acostly procedure possibly worthwhile
forsayGerman ,orFrench ,orItalian ,butnever likely tobeworth­
while forminority languages . .
Theproposers believe they can develop asystem ,using abinary coded
version ofEsperanto asanintermediate language (because Esperanto
isaviable language -itisunderstood byabout 20million -and
because ofthe absence ofgrammatical irregularities and lexical ambi­
guities init),making useofafirmware chip incorporated invideotex
sets ,that will allow thegeneral public tointerrogate databases and
receive them ontheir screen intheir own language .Thefinal system
would make use ofcomputer aided translation oftheoriginal database
into Esperanto (which ,with theoriginal language version ,will bethe
only version that will need updating )andfully automatic translation
from theEsperanto database via thefirmware chip into the language
ofthe owner ofthevideotex receiver .Such apossibility would have
advantages formain language speakers -thecosts ofcreating and main­
taining aseparate database ineach language would beavoided -but
even greater advantage for those who share thenative language ofthe
two proposers since ,without some such development ,they will either be
barred access toCommunity wide databases ,orbecondemned tolearn
another language ,probably English .
Theproject istechnically risky .Success can innoway beguaranteed .
However the Commission does not ,nor did the other members ofthe
Advisory Committee ,accept the arguments putforward bythe two
member states opposing theproject that itistoo farfetched ,at :n
duplication ofother work on,forexample ,Eurotra .Theproposal ■.?
notfor ageneral purpose translation system ,butspecially get-d
videotex systems ,and the sorts ofdatabase likely tobemade ^_
through videotex .Other work ,onforexample theTitus projet ,: ,
shown that theapproach might befeasible .TheCommission 'sprop
tofinance afeasibility study andpilot trial ofthesoftware nt:.
sary for thefirmware chip iswell suited toshowing ifthe technical
difficulties inthewayofdeveloping thefull system can beresolveu .

,1
Wider aims ofthe support mechanism
7.There isone other consideration which ,inparticular ,argues for the
adoption not only ofthis but also ofthe one other proposal onwhich
the Advisory Committee didnot find aqualified majority for afavour­
able opinion ,andwhich isalso being put forward bythe Commission
atthis time .This isnational -balance .Bythis theCommission isnot ,
inany way ,advancing the doctrine ofjuste retour .However ,one of
theobjects ofthe Community support mechanism istobuild upthe
industry ,Community wide ,through collaborative projects .Tothis end
theCommission hassought toinclude worthwhile projects (and this
project isintheCommission 'sopinion ,ashas already been said ,worth­
while initsownright )from thesmaller member states and software
houses .Now this ,and the other proposal ,involve three ofthe smaller
member states ,and one state -the Netherlands -would beinvolved in
both .Both were rejected intheAdvisory Committee bythe votes ofthe
same two larger member states ,both ofwhom arewell represented among
the 18accepted and 2proposals still under consideration .The
Commission hopes that the Council will give dueweight tothis politi­
calargument ,andwill let itoutweigh thetechnical arguments against
these twoprojects that were put forward intheAdvisory Committee by
the representatives ofthose two states ,which arguments were not ,in
any event ,supported bythemajority oftherepresentatives from the
other member states .

PROPOSAL FOR A
COUNCIL DECISION
offering support under theCommunity support mechanism inthe field
ofdata-processing under Council Regulation (EEC )N°1996 /79to
Buro voor Systeemontwikkeling ofUtrecht andChristian Rovsing of
Copenhagen
THECOUNCIL OFTHEEUROPEAN COMMUNITIES ,
Having regard totheTreaty establishing theEuropean Economic
Community ;
Having regard toCouncil Regulation (EEC )N°1996 /79of11September
1979 onaCommunity support mechanism inthefield ofdata-processing
(1)and inparticular Article 8thereof ;
paving regard totheproposal from theCommission ;
Whereas theCommission hasreceived anapplication forsupport for
afeasibility study for "multi-lingual facilities /"orvideotex
information systems ",tobefollowed ,ifsuccessful ,byapilot project
(hereinafter theproject )inresponse toitssecond call forproposals
forsoftware andapplication projects from Buro voor Systeem -
ontwikkeling ofUtrecht andChristian Rovsing ofCopenhagen ;
Whereas theCommission has intended proceeding with theproposal and
Jiassubmitted accordingly totheAdvisory Committee fortheManagement
andCpordination ofData-Processing Programmes aDraft Decision
accompanied byareport ;
Whereas theCommittee didnotgive afavourable decision onthe *
Commission 'sDraft Decision with thequalifying majority required by
the said Regulation ;
Whereas theproject covered bytheapplication corresponds with the
conditions ofthe said Council Regulation andwith theaims and
iprj,teria of'themultiannual programme (1979 to1983 )adopted bythe
Coupcii jj-tsDecision 79/783/EEC (1);
Whereas this project islikely tolead tothedevelopment ofasystem
which would include ,in.duecourse ,firmware forvideotex terminals
that will translate information from anunambiguous intermediate
language (eg.Esperanto )into agiven natural language ,and ,thus ,help
toovercome thelanguage barrier totheopening upoftheCommon Market
tothewidespread provision ofinformation services from initially -
mono-lingual databases through videotex ,andappears ,therefore ,tobe
ofCommunity interest within theterms ofArticle 3ofthesaid Council
Regulation ;
Whereas £tistheCommission 'sopinion that theproposers should
concentrate inthefirst instance ontheproblems posed bytranslation
from theintermediate language andthat this point becovered inthe
support contract ,
f-n n.T1.9-3111gppt-pmhpr 197-0- .../...
Provisional address :Ru«deI.Loi200.B-1049Brussels-Telephone 7350040/7358040-Teiepr.pn.c «C=re„:"COMEUfiBrusseV-
Telex :"21877COMEU B"
A

-2-
HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION :
Article 1
Buro voor Systeemontwikkelmg ofUtrecht andChristian Rovsing of
Copenhagen shall beoffered thesupport ofagrant of100% ofcosts up
toamaximum of100.000 ECU for thefeasibility study and aloan of50%
ofcosts uptoamaximum of198.785 ECU for thepilot project tobe
paid asthe work proceeds .
Article 2
The loan shall berepayable totheCommission during theperiod i?87 to
1991 .
Article 3
This support shall bethe subject ofacontract tobenegotiated speci­
fying the details oftheproject and the detailed conditions for the
support .The offer ofsupport shall lapse ifthis contract benot
concluded within four months ofthe date ofthis Decision orwithin
such longer period that attherequest oftheproposers theCommission
shall have granted inwriting .
Article 4
This Decision isaddressed to :
Buro voor Systeemontwikkeling
Kon .Wilhelminalaan 3
Postbus 8348
3503 Utrecht
The Netherlands
Christian Rovsing International A/S
H.C. Andersons Blvd 12
1553 Copenhagen V
Denmark .
Done inBrussels , For the Council