Representations and Recommendations Unless otherwise stated in writing, neither Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc, nor its brokers or licensees have made, on their own behalf, any representations or warranties, express or implied, with respect to any element of the Property including but not limited to, the legal sufficiency, legal effect, or tax consequences of this transaction. Any information furnished by either party should be independently verified before that party relies on such information. Xxxxxxxx Realty Inc. recommends that Buyer consult its attorneys and accountants before signing this Agreement regarding the terms and conditions herein and that Seller satisfy itself as to the financial ability of Buyer to perform.
Conclusions and Recommendations The demonstration and evaluation process provided an opportunity to test community specific tools with a range of end users from the memory institution domain and to gain greater insight into both the current and future evolution of the SHAMAN prototypes for preservation, access and re-use. Xxxx et al. (2000) in their user evaluation study of the Alexandria Digital Library which incorporated the evaluation of a Web prototype by earth scientists, information specialists and educators raised four key questions in relation to their findings that SHAMAN may be well advised to consider, they are paraphrased here with our conclusions from the investigations. What have we learned about our target organizations and potential users? Memory institutions are most definitely not a homogenised group; their needs and requirements differ greatly across the domain. Representatives of the archives community are agreed on the benefits of SHAMAN‟s authenticity validation function. The representatives of government information services remained unconvinced as to the need or benefit of grid technologies or distributed ingest while librarians saw the value of grid access as an asset of the framework. What have we learned about the evaluation approach for digital preservation? Within the limits of the exercise, in terms of time-frame and resources, the approach adopted has generated useful information for the further development of demonstrators and for the development of the SHAMAN framework overall. What have we learned about the SHAMAN ISP1 demonstrator? Respondents to the evaluation questionnaires and the focus groups indicate that, overall, the presentation of the demonstrator worked effectively and that, in general, participants in the demonstration and evaluation events were able to understand the intentions of the demonstration and to apply the ideas presented to their own context. What have we learned about the applicability of the SHAMAN framework to memory institutions? Respondents to the questionnaires and participants in the focus groups readily identified the value of the SHAMAN framework to their own operations. The majority had not yet established a long-term digital preservation policy, but recognized the need. Generally, the concepts of distributed ingest and grid operations found favour. Virtually all practitioners in the focus groups, however, drew attention to need of a lower level demonstration that would be closer to their everyday preservation troubles, especially for digital preservation to be applied to non-textual materials, such as film, photographs and sound archives. In addition to the criteria suggested by Xxxx et al., we can add a further project-related question: What have we learned that has implications for the training and dissemination phase of the Project? It was not part of the remit of the demonstration and evaluation specifically to discover information of relevance to the training and dissemination function. However, a number of factors will affect the efficacy of any training programme in particular. o First, no common understanding of digital preservation can be assumed of the potential target audiences for training. Consequently, it is likely that self-paced learning materials will be most effective in presenting the SHAMAN framework. o Secondly, the aims of SHAMAN as a project must be conveyed clearly: specifically, that it is a kind of „proof-of-concept‟ project and is not intended to deliver a package of programs capable of being implemented by institutions. o Thirdly, it needs to be emphasised that the SHAMAN framework is not limited to text documents; it can be applied to materials of all kinds. However, the demonstrations relate to bodies of material that were actually available for use. o Fourthly, the existing presentation materials are capable of being adapted for use in training activities. o Finally, the target audiences will appreciate the possibility of online access to the demonstrator, which will need to have very great ease of access in order that people with diverse backgrounds are able to use it with equal facility. We believe that, overall, WP14 has met its aims and objectives in this demonstration and evaluation of ISP1. Valuable lessons have been learnt by all parties involved, which will be transferred to the evaluation of ISP2 in the coming months.
GEOGRAPHIC AREA AND SECTOR SPECIFIC ALLOWANCES, CONDITIONS AND EXCEPTIONS The following allowances and conditions shall apply where relevant: Where the company does work which falls under the following headings, the company agrees to pay and observe the relevant respective conditions and/or exceptions set out below in each case.
Accessibility of Web-Based Information and Applications For State Agency Authorized User Acquisitions: Any web-based information and applications development, or programming delivered pursuant to the contract or procurement, will comply with New York State Enterprise IT Policy NYS-P08-005, Accessibility of Web-Based Information and Applications as follows: Any web-based information and applications development, or programming delivered pursuant to the contract or procurement, will comply with New York State Enterprise IT Policy NYS-P08- 005, Accessibility of Web-Based Information and Applications as such policy may be amended, modified or superseded, which requires that state agency web-based information and applications are accessible to persons with disabilities. Web-based information and applications must conform to New York State Enterprise IT Policy NYS-P08-005 as determined by quality assurance testing. Such quality assurance testing will be conducted by the State Agency Authorized User and the results of such testing must be satisfactory to the Authorized User before web-based information and applications will be considered a qualified deliverable under the contract or procurement.
Provisions for Covered Entity to Inform Business Associate of Privacy Practices and Restrictions (a) Covered Entity shall notify Business Associate of any limitation(s) in the notice of privacy practices of Covered Entity under 45 CFR 164.520, to the extent that such limitation may affect Business Associate’s use or disclosure of protected health information.
Clarifications and Interpretations It may be determined that clarifications or interpretations of the Contract Documents are necessary. Upon direction by the ODR such clarifications or interpretations will be provided by the A/E consistent with the intent of the Contract Documents. The A/E will issue these clarifications with reasonable promptness to the Contractor as Architect’s Supplemental Instruction (ASI) or similar instrument. If Contractor believes that such clarification or interpretation justifies an adjustment in the Contract Sum or the Contract Time, the Contractor shall so notify the Owner in accordance with the provisions of Article 11.
Securities Law Information The Participant acknowledges that he or she is permitted to sell the Shares acquired under the Plan through the designated broker appointed by the Company, provided the sale of the Shares takes place outside of Canada through facilities of a stock exchange on which the Shares are listed (i.e., the NYSE).
Exceptions to Informal Negotiations and Arbitration The Parties agree that the following Disputes are not subject to the above provisions concerning informal negotiations and binding arbitration: (a) any Disputes seeking to enforce or protect, or concerning the validity of, any of the intellectual property rights of a Party; (b) any Dispute related to, or arising from, allegations of theft, piracy, invasion of privacy, or unauthorized use; and (c) any claim for injunctive relief. If this provision is found to be illegal or unenforceable, then neither Party will elect to arbitrate any Dispute falling within that portion of this provision found to be illegal or unenforceable and such Dispute shall be decided by a court of competent jurisdiction within the courts listed for jurisdiction above, and the Parties agree to submit to the personal jurisdiction of that court. CORRECTIONS There may be information on the Site that contains typographical errors, inaccuracies, or omissions, including descriptions, pricing, availability, and various other information. We reserve the right to correct any errors, inaccuracies, or omissions and to change or update the information on the Site at any time, without prior notice.
Definitions and Rules of Interpretation In this Contract, the following terms, whether capitalized or not, shall have the meanings set forth below, unless it is clear in the Contract that the context requires otherwise. In addition, the rules of interpretation set forth below shall apply.
Conclusion and Recommendations D. Evaluations for Offenders without a sex offense conviction shall answer the following additional referral questions in the evaluations:
