(1) e-Science through Middleware: We have to take ownership of the task to demonstrate that middleware is required for e-Science underpinned with evidence. This opens the ears of funding organizations and perhaps even larger user communities.

(2) European Leadership in middleware development: the middleware in Europe is the most used ones world-wide for the e-Science infrastructures. We are eager to continue this leadership with institutes commitment.

(3) Benefits of loosely coupled cooperation in Europe: demonstrate that collaboration makes sense encouraging healthy competition in science and avoiding the re-development of existing related work.

(4) ScienceSoft as continuation of EMI and its chances for scientific and open source markets.

(5) Outline envisaged landscape in e-Science for the next 5 years including new data wave aspects faced in science and engineering.

0. Future form of collaboration: a consortium, a foundation, a project, a forum etc; or maybe no collaboration at all, apart of existing frameworks like UNICORE, NorduGrid, OGF etc (I don't know the answer, but the latter seems to be most realistic)

I'd say that this is the one and only really strategic decision that EMI must make now. Everything else depends on the outcome of this decision.

1. Define target customers: primarily research infrastructures, or primarily businesses, or some mixture (I'd say, it is only research). In the same vein, we must decide whether we want to stick with existing customers, or attempt to expand to new infrastructures within Europe.

2. Partners should express their commitment (or absence of such) to common standards and approaches developed during EMI, and possibly to be developed in future.

3. Funding: strategic step is to decide whether support should be sought from EU, or from national governments, or from individual research projects, or in a commercial manner. These decisions can even be made on per-product basis.

4. Place on the global arena: do we want to penetrate "markets" outside Europe, possibly attracting contributors, or do we stay chiefly within Europe.

Based on what I already mentioned on the last week meeting I would have the following comments: * In the sections From mw to Scientific Results I would mention the ecosystem of the science. How science works? What brings scientific results forward? How simulations, computers, supercomputers help in achieving them? * I would also put something like European middleware in Europe landscaping the potential user communities like CERN, PRACE, the Nordic communities, etc.

> What would be your top 5 strategic topics this document should cover?

Mine in the order of preference:

1. Research and e-infrastructures tomorrow 2. Loosing European leadership... 3. Non-interoperable mw 4. From the mw to scientific results 5. EMI brand - SWOT