Minutes of the Council Meeting

4-5 March 98, Manchester, GB

Table of Contents

1. ACTION LIST C 98
2. ATTENDANCE LIST C 98
3. COUNCIL MEETING

3.1 Call Meeting to Order
3.2 Approval of Agenda
3.3 Approval of Minutes (C 97, Canela)
3.4 President’s Report
3.5 Secretary’s Report
3.6 Executive Board Meeting Report
3.7 Congresses
    3.7.1 WCC 96 Final Report
    3.7.2 WCC 98 - Organizing Committee
    3.7.3 WCC 98 - International Program Committee
    3.7.4 WCC 2000
    3.7.5 WCC 2002
3.8 Membership Classes
3.9 Professional Qualifications
3.10 Strategic Planning
3.11 Treasurer’s Report
3.12 Technical Assembly
3.13 Activity Management Board
3.14 Technical Committees
    3.14.1 TC 1 Foundations of Computer Science
    3.14.2 TC 2 Software: Theory and Practice
    3.14.3 TC 3 Education
    3.14.4 TC 5 Computer Applications in Technology
    3.14.5 TC 6 Communication Systems
    3.14.6 TC 7 System Modelling and Optimization
    3.14.7 TC 8 Information Systems
    3.14.8 TC 9 Relationship Between Computers and Society
    3.14.9 TC 10 Computer Systems Technology
    3.14.10  TC 11 Security and Protection of IP Systems
    3.14.11  TC 12 Artificial Intelligence
    3.14.12  TC 13 Human-Computer Interaction
3.15 Committee Reports
    3.15.1 Publications Committee
    3.15.2 Statutes and Bylaws
    3.15.3 Admissions Committee
    3.15.4 Congress Committee
    3.15.5 DCSC
    3.15.6 Finance Committee
    3.15.7 IFIP-UNESCO Liaison
    3.15.8 Internal Awards Committee
    3.15.9 Marketing Committee
    3.15.10  IFIP Newsletter
3.16 Future Meetings
3.17 Other Business
3.18 Closing of Meeting

1. ACTION LIST C 98

2. ATTENDANCE LIST C 98

Council Members Present

K. Bauknecht		President 
P. Bollerslev		President Elect
W. Brauer		Vice-President
A. Goldsworthy		Vice-President
W. Grafendorfer		Vice-President
C. Guy			Vice-President
G. J. Morris		Secretary 
D. Khakhar		Treasurer 
R. Aiken		Trustee, AMB Chair
J. Granado		Trustee, FC Chair
M. Goyal		Trustee, DCSC Chair
R. Johnson 		Trustee, PC Chair
T. Miura		Trustee
X. Yan			Trustee, AC Chair

TC Chairs Present

G. Ausiello 		TC 1
R. Kurki-Suonio		TC 2
B. Samways		TC 3 
G. Doumeingts		TC 5 
P. Kall			TC 7 
B. Glasson		TC 8 
J.-C. Laprie		TC 10
B. von Solms		TC 11 
B. Neumann		TC 12 
J. Hammond		TC 13

Observers Present

E. Hoerbst		IPC Chair, Congress 98
X. Li			China
J. Rosenfeld		IFIP NL Editor and Individual Member
H. Sakai		Japan
K. Tabata		Japan 
M. Toth			OC Co-chair, Congress 98 
M. Zhou			OC Vice-chair, Congress 2000 

IFIP Secretariat

P. Nedkov		Executive Director, CO and UNESCO Liaison
D. Hayden

Apologies from Council Members

M. Gottlieb		Trustee, MC Chair
R. Reis			Trustee

Apologies from TC Chairs

A. Casaca		TC 6
P. Jaervinen		TC 9

Regrets from P. Bobillier, K. Boyanov, K de Brisis, J. Dolezal, C. Gergely and the representatives of IASC, ICCC, INFORMS, IAPR, SEARCC and VLDB.

3. COUNCIL MEETING

3.1 Call Meeting to Order

The President opened the Council meeting and welcomed all participants. He expressed IFIP’s thanks to the British Computer Society and the Department of Computer Science at the University of Manchester for the invitation and the hospitality arrangements. He was very happy to hold the Council meeting in a university environment of such high standing and was grateful to everyone associated with the Council organization.

The Secretary announced Council attendance and regrets (please refer to the list of attendance).

3.2 Approval of Agenda

Council unanimously ADOPTED the Agenda.

3.3 Approval of Minutes (C 97, Canela)

Council unanimously APPROVED the Minutes of the September 97 Council meeting in Canela, Brazil.

The President reminded that all Council and General Assembly Minutes come with Action points and it is important for the IFIP Officers and TC Chairs to see that these actions are implemented.

The Secretary recalled Council’s decision not to hold specific meetings at GA. A short Council meeting will be convened to decide on future Council meetings and any other matter requiring specific Council approval.

3.4 President’s Report

Mr. Bauknecht drew attention to his report and informed that several positive developments were observed with respect to event organization, IFIP’s external relations and Congress preparations.

IFIP was involved in the organization of 73 events in 1997. IFIP publications were selling well and since the last GA 97 meeting in Canela there is an increased interest in IFIP from its Members. Active contact is maintained with Member societies and Affiliates. Canada and Israel have sent invitations to host Congress 2002 and there is a notable increase in IFIP’s interaction with UNESCO for which Mr. Bauknecht is grateful to the IFIP-UNESCO Liaison Officer.

Preparations for Congress 98 are proceeding well and the President was well engaged with the Congress arrangements. He had visited China to discuss Congress 2000 matters and was pleased with the results of this visit. In Manchester, further interaction was initiated towards planning and organizing a successful IFIP Congress in Beijing.

Finally, the President wished to acknowledge with thanks the work of the TC, AMB, DCSC and PC Chairs, the Newsletter editor and his EB colleagues for their efforts in support of IFIP. Mr. Bauknecht commended the excellent management of the IFIP Secretariat, which contributes to a wider IFIP visibility and is a powerhouse to major initiatives.

Mr. Rosenfeld wished to know what happened to ICSU’s initiative to form an Informatics Union. The President responded that currently ICSU is preoccupied with other organizational priorities and there has been no development since his last report at GA 97.

3.5 Secretary’s Report

The Secretary reported that Nigeria was expelled as a Member after many communications with no response. Albania, Armenia, Greece and Tunisia face potential expulsion at the end of 1998 as they have outstanding dues for more than 3 years. Belarus was given until the end of 1998 to satisfy the admission criteria and if it does not pay its 1998 membership dues by the end of this year it will be deleted from IFIP’s membership list.

GA 97 voted New Zealand into membership. A partial payment of the 97 dues was made, however, an outstanding amount remains so as to meet the admissions requirements. Bulgaria has lost voting rights (outstanding dues for 1997) and Ireland and Russia are in suspension (outstanding dues for 96 and 97). The Philippines, as Associate member, has outstanding dues from 1996.

With respect to the IFIP Secretariat, Mr. Morris said he was pleased and grateful for its excellent work and was confident that many IFIP people felt the same way. As Council is aware there are only two staff members at the Secretariat and any sudden burst of activity may cause problems. For this reason communications and documents should be handled with care.

The Secretary referred to the GA 97 decision to include the names of WG members in the printed version of the Bulletin and, by implication, to send a copy to everyone. TC chairs were reminded of this decision soon after GA and a flood of amendments resulted. This experience shows the necessity for TCs and WGs to submit amendments (including addresses and other contact information) to the Secretariat as and when they arise. It is vital to have updated membership information and Mr. Morris encouraged the TC Chairs to communicate this to their constituencies.

The Secretary said there were also financial implications and the cost of distribution increased by a factor of more than 2.5 times. Mrs. Hammond referred to the GA 97 decision and did not recall that it was agreed to distribute the Bulletin to all WG members. Mr. Morris responded that the names of the WG members are already posted on the Web and the reason to distribute is implied by the GA decision.

The President stressed that WG membership lists become obsolete quickly and there is no reason to distribute them in hard copy. The Web version of the WG lists can be kept reasonably updated and the online information is the way IFIP should proceed in future. The Secretary concurred. Mr. Johnson agreed and said that this issue was also addressed during the PC meeting.

Mr. Morris suggested that the current TC and WG membership present scope for review by TA and the respective TCs as there are significant disparities in membership numbers. The majority of TCs have an official membership of around 30. The majority of WGs have membership from 10 to 49 but eleven have fewer than 10 members and one 195.

Finally, the Secretary announced that GA 98 would elect two vice-presidents and three trustees. In addition a treasurer-elect and a secretary-elect will be elected to take office in 1999. Mr. Khakhar has agreed to stand as Treasurer for another term.

Mr. Johnson wished to know the situation with the French Member of IFIP. Mr. Doumeingts responded that AFCET was dissolved. Steps are taken to create an umbrella organization of several associations. This would take the form of a federation and the French Ministry of Industry is supportive. Mr. Rosenfeld requested to know the number of IFIP voting Members and the Secretary said these are currently 36.

3.6 Executive Board Meeting Report

Messrs. Bauknecht and Morris reported on several matters related to the EB meeting discussion and informed that other issues will be brought up under the respective agenda items.

A request was received from TC 3 for a subsidy for the TC 3 Journal. It was deemed justified to subsidize the Journal for up to two years based on a C & H report. The year by year subsidy implies up to GBP 3,639 at the end of the first year and up to GBP 672 for the second year. Thereafter no further support is envisaged.

Executive Board recommends to Admissions Committee to consider submitting to GA 98 for endorsement the nominations of two new Honorary members, namely Messrs. Sendov and Melbye. AC is further invited to consider submitting Mr. J. Rosenfeld’s nomination for a second term of Individual membership. EB would advise the S & B committee to consider a change to the IFIP Statutes and Bylaws which, if voted by GA 98, would envisage in future EB instead of AC to recommend to GA nominations for Honorary and Individual members.

Mr. Rosenfeld was uncomfortable and concerned with this recommendation to bypass AC. He felt this is an expression of management style of decision-making concentration within EB. Messrs. Glasson and Johnson supported Mr. Rosenfeld’s opinion and felt there was no urgency in making such a recommendation to the S & B committee. Moreover, if deemed necessary AC should be expanded with experienced IFIP people who can make objective judgement with regard to possible candidates. The Secretary explained that he is sensitive to these comments and that EB is much more transparent in its work than before. The criteria for the proposal are very vague and it is likely that GA will consider other options.

The Secretary reported that further input from IFIP Members would be solicited including the possibility of creating a Members' Forum during GA. The GA 98 Agenda would be intended to generate more discussion on issues related to IFIP’s membership. The Congress Guidelines are out of date and it is essential to update them urgently, in particular with respect to financial matters. Staff pensions were also on the EB agenda. Some preparatory work was done last year and the remainder will be tackled soon so as to set the scheme in operation. Four nominations were received for the Auerbach Award. Out of these, one was not eligible. The chosen recipient will be announced during Congress 98. Finally, the Secretary informed that EB was not happy with the work of some IFIP Standing Committees.

3.7 Congresses

Mr. Goldsworthy reported that the problem with the outstanding guaranteed sum to IFIP is not yet resolved. It is a very sensitive matter and ACS has made a proposal, which will be further considered by EB. The President confirmed that he has had extensive communication with the new President of ACS and hopes that the issue will soon be resolved. Mr. Bauknecht expects EB to comply with the principle of equal treatment to all Congress organizers.

3.7.2 Organizing Committee

Mrs. Toth and Mr. Grafendorfer, Co-chairs of the Organizing Committee reported on the preparations. Responsibilities are divided between the secretariats of the Austrian Computer Society and the John v. Neumann Computer Society. Subcommittees oversee special tasks and an Advisory Board chaired by the Presidents of the two societies supervises the Organizing Committee. Financial coordination follows strict principles with a continuously updated budget. The two societies decided to waive all Congress related expenses prior to Canberra.

A Press and Media Committee is responsible for the marketing activities of the 15^th IFIP World Computer Congress. IFIP Members are kindly requested to assist the dissemination of information and to create links to the Congress sites at http://www.ocg.or.at/ifip98.html and http://www.njszt.iif.hu/ifip98.html

Congress materials are distributed as follows:

Congress preparations comply with the following schedule:

Press releases were sent to journals and further advertisement is planned. The IFIP Newsletter has been very cooperative and the organizers are grateful to Mr. Rosenfeld. Press conferences will be held on 10 March in Vienna and on 7 May in Budapest. A 100 ATS telephone card with the WCC 98 insignia was produced in cooperation with Post & Telekom Austria and is available since January 98. A WCC 98 special stamp will be produced by the Hungarian Post Office.

As of 26 February 98 1,320 persons from 86 countries have expressed interest in Congress by returning the completed hard copy information request forms (74,8%) or by using the online forms (25,2%). The USA and Australia are among the first 5 leading countries in these statistics. About 60 registrations are already made.

A Sponsorship Committee is in charge of activities in Austria and Hungary and internationally. The organizers are very grateful to the IFIP President and the IFIP Secretariat for their support.

IFIP Congress 98 is supported by:

Main Sponsors

• Austrian Federal Ministry for Science and Transport
• European Union
• Foundation for Technological Development of Industry, Hungary
• City of Vienna
• IBM Austria (equipment for conference registration in Vienna, "Internet Café" in Vienna)
• Ministry for Culture and Education of Hungary
• Oracle Austria (dedicated to the official opening in the Viennese Musikvereinssaal)
• Oracle Hungary (dedicated to the opening in Budapest)
• Sun Microsystems (dedicated to the Reception by the Lord Mayor of Vienna)
• Vienna Tourist Board

Sponsors

• Hungarian Post Office (special stamp in Hungary announcing WCC 98)
• MATAV, Hungary
• National Committee for Technological Development, Hungary
• Post & Telekom Austria (telephone card in Austria announcing WCC 98)
• Siemens Nixdorf Austria
• Sony DADC Austria (production of the CD ROM with the conference proceedings)
• Taverna, Hungary

The official opening of the 15^th IFIP World Computer Congress will take place on Monday, 31 August 1998, 9.30 a.m. at the Musikvereinssaal in Vienna. In Budapest, the opening will take place at the Vigszinház theatre.

Austrian Airlines (AUA) and Hungarian Airlines (MALEV) are the Official Carriers of the 15^th IFIP World Computer Congress. A 15% reduction on flights will be provided to Congress participants. MALEV is considering a discount for one-way flights while AUA for return flights only. Both airlines support the organizers with free tickets to the amount of 75.000 ATS each.

The transfer on 2 September from Vienna to Budapest will be carried out as follows:

• 10.00 - 12.30 Vienna – Komarom (H) by train (Customs procedures and passport control on the train)
• 12.30 - 13.30 Boarding: The luggage of participants will be transferred directly to Budapest.
• 13.30 - 20.00 Boat trip on the picturesque part of the Danube

Three big ships will be used for the transfer between Komarom and Budapest. Each ship has conference facilities for 100 persons. IFIP bodies are invited to explore the possibility of holding meetings onboard. Direct train transfers to Budapest are also envisaged.

Congress 98 will convene at the Vienna University of Technology and the Budapest University of Technology. Conference halls have a seating capacity of 600 - 800 persons at both venues. Equipment will be available to relay presentations of Keynote speakers to adjacent rooms.

Approximately 1500 hotel rooms in different categories are reserved in each city. Price ranges from 200 ATS (Budapest) and 250 ATS (Vienna) to 1860 ATS (for single room).

Fees were announced in November 1997. The calculation is based on a breakeven point of 849 paying participants.

* Individuals belonging to Member societies of IFIP or CEPIS

An additional 5% discount to the early registration fee is offered to persons registering before 10 April. Group discounts are also offered.

The registration fee includes the printed proceedings of the specific conference, a CD-ROM with the proceedings of all conferences and coffee during the conference days. The registration fee also includes the cost of some of the social events. The tutorial/workshop/seminar fees are 600 ATS per tutorial for registered Congress delegates and 3600 ATS for others.

Social events included in conference fee:

• Welcome Cocktail in Vienna (30 August, evening)
• Reception by the Lord Mayor of Vienna in the City Hall with summer ball (31 August, evening)
• Reception by CEPIS celebrating the 10 year anniversary of CEPIS (1 September, late afternoon)
• Transfer of the congress by ships on the river Danube (2 September)
• Hungarian reception (3 September evening)

(A fee of 1400 ATS would apply for accompanying persons).

Social events not included in conference fee:

• Heuriger (typical Viennese wine tavern), 1 September 1998, evening
• Congress banquet, 4 September 1998, evening

The organizers have tried hard to raise funds in support of Congress Speakers and participants. The following sources were explored:

• A grant from European Union (ECUS 30.000 = ATS 420.000) to support speakers and participants from Eastern European Countries and developing countries in the Mediterranean Area has been received.
• Hungarian participants may get financial support by the Federation for Technological Development of Industry, Hungary (ATS 124.000) and the Ministry for Culture and Education of Hungary (ATS 310.000).
• FOCUS has received a grant from the U.S. National Science Foundation to provide partial travel support to 15 U.S. scientists/IT experts as participants at the 15^th IFIP World Computer Congress. In addition, FOCUS has applied for a second grant to fund an additional 15.
• IFIP applied for a UNESCO grant to support participants from developing countries.

The President thanked the OC Co-chairs for their report and stressed that the transfer from Vienna to Budapest is critical for the successful Congress outcome. Mr. Rosenfeld agreed and said there will be many unhappy faces if people cannot get appropriate meals on board or arrive in Budapest to find that restaurants and other catering facilities are closed for the night. Mr. Aiken opined that people sometimes wonder why IFIP congresses have high registration fees. With regard to Congress 98 he tells them that this is due to the elaborate transfer which adds to the cost.

Mr. Brauer advised that car rentals in both venues should be available easily. Mr. Goldsworthy advised the organizers to consider advertising a daily registration fee as an effective mechanism to raise additional participation.

Mr. Laprie advised that there should be a clearer statement about what is meant by the registration fee for IFIP members and thought that a Congress Dinner should be included in the registration fee.

The IPC Chair, Mr. Hoerbst, reported that Congress 98 would consist of the following conferences:

• SEC ´98 - 14^th International Information Security Conference
  PC co-chairs: G. Papp (H), R. Posch (A)
  http://www.ocg.or.at/sec.html  
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/sec.html

• ICCHP ´98 - Int. Conference on Computers Helping People with Special Needs
  PC chair: A. Edwards (UK), vice-chairs: A. Arató (H), W. Zagler (A)
  http://www.ocg.or.at/icchp.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/icchp.html

• KnowRight ´98 - International Conference on Intellectual Property Rights and Free Flow Of Information
• PC chair: K. Brunnstein (D) vice-chairs: G. Oberrecht (H), P. Randle (GB), P. P. Sint (A)
  http://www.ocg.or.at/knori.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/knori.html

• Fundamentals - Foundations of Computer Science
• PC chair: K. Mehlhorn (D), Kall (CH), Lovács (H)
  http://www.ocg.or.at/fund.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/fund.html

• IT KNOWS - Information Technology and Knowledge Systems
  PC chair: J. J. Cuena (E), Markús (H), A. M. Tjoa (A)
• http://www.ocg.or.at/itk.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/itk.html

• Teleteaching ´98 - Distance Learning, Training and Education
  PC chair: J. Wibe (N), vice-chairs: T. Lajos (H), E. Riedling (A)
  http://www.ocg.or.at/tteach.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/tteach.html

• Telecooperation - Global Office, Teleworking, Communication Tools
  PC chair: R. Traunmüller (A), vice-chairs: A. Siegler (H), D. Vogel (USA),
  http://www.ocg.or.at/tcoop.html
  http://www.njszt.iif.hu/tcoop.html

Each congress day will start with a keynote presentation at a plenary session. The Keynote speakers are:

• Prof. Andries van Dam, Professor of Computer Science at Brown University, Providence, USA
• Dr. George Metakides, Director of the European Program for Research and Development in Information Technology (ESPRIT)
• Dr. Gordon Moore, Chairman of the Board, Emeritus, Intel Corporation
• Prof. Yunhe Pan, Zhejang University, Director of Artificial Intelligence Institute, Director of Industrial Design Institute, PR China

J.A.N. Lee (USA) together with G. Kovacs (H) and H. Zemanek (A) are working on a proposal to organize a Pioneers day. P. Pfannes from the European Youth Parliament and Mag. K. Miesenberger from the University of Linz are working on a proposal for a Youth Forum as part of IFIP World Computer Congress 98.

As of 26 February 1998, 615 submissions for papers were received. Some PCs have extended the official deadline to allow further submissions. The current situation is as follows:

Mr. Aiken wished to know how was the estimate on tracks determined and felt that active contact should be kept with all persons who have submitted a paper. Mr. Hoerbst explained that the number is based on the assumption that an average paper presentation would last 30 minutes and on a forecast number of accepted papers. As some of the conferences have a long tradition and since the deadlines have been extended, a high quality scientific program could be achieved even if the rejection rate does not reach the usual 50%. The IPC Chair considers that more than 3 tracks are not desirable. The President expressed an opinion that the size of the conferences should be determined by the quality of papers and not by track limitations.

Mr. Hoerbst informed that no Call for Papers was issued for the Fundamentals conference as the PC Chair, Prof. Mehlhorn, intended to have invited speakers only. Despite that, 27 submissions for contributions came in. The accepted ones will be presented at one of the sessions, for which responsibility is assigned to the IPC Chair.

Each PC may invite well-known speakers for their specific conference, which will be announced in the Congress program. It is suggested to have two invited speakers per conference.

Afternoon sessions (17.15–18.15) for short 10-minute presentations are scheduled for Monday, 31 August, Tuesday, 1 September and Thursday, 3 September. (Such presentations may also be delivered during regular conference sessions depending on the recommendations from the review committees). Poster sessions are also envisaged and poster presentations will be organized in a way to allow the attendance of authors in order to stimulate a discussion.

Tutorials, consisting of a full day of lectures on a specific topic will be held as follows:

Vienna Tutorial Program (Sunday, 30 August)

• High-Level Issues in Internet Security, E. B. Fernandez, Florida Atlantic University, USA
• Structured Design of Hypermedia Applications, Tomas Isakowitz, Wharton School of Business University of Pennsylvania, USA
• The Engineering and Re-engineering of Information Systems: From Formalized Descriptions of Business Processes to Automatic Workflow Applications Michael Sherwood-Smith, University College Dublin, Dublin, RI, Jean-Loup Chapelet and Christine Poupa, IDEAP, CH
• Mobile Networks and Intelligent Computing, Ben Wah and V. Bharghavan, University of Illinois, USA
• Formal Specification of Computer Systems: Selected Methods and Supporting Software Tools, Jan Madey, Warsaw University, PL

Budapest Tutorial Program (Saturday, 5 September)

• Electronic Commerce, S. H. von Solms, Rand Afrikaans University Johannesburg, ZA
• Collaborative Technologies, Lisa Neal, EDS, USA
• Building Usable and Useful Tools for Software Maintenance and Evolution, Anneliese von Mayrhauser, Colorado State University, USA
• Document Design, Document Markup, and the Converging Worlds of Computer Typesetting and Electronic Publishing, Philip Taylor, RHBNC, University of London, UK, Jiri Zlatuska, Masaryk University in Brno, Czech Republic
• Formal Software Engineering: From Domain Engineering via Requirements Engineering To Software Design a Formal Specification and Design Calculus Approach, Dines Bjorner, Technical University of Denmark, Denmark

The following general workshops are scheduled in Vienna (Sunday, 30 August):

• Evolution of ICT Use, Hettinga/Heeren/Andriessen, NL
• Database Powered Web Applications for Internet Marketing and Commerce, Goeschka/Manninger, A

A workshop (Database Powered Web Applications for Internet Marketing and Commerce, Goeschka/Manninger, A, in co-operation with a Hungarian expert group) is scheduled in Budapest on 5 September.

All conference proceedings will be available as CD-ROMs to all congress participants. The printed version of the proceedings of six conferences will be published in the book series of the Austrian Computer Society. Each participant will receive a copy of the proceedings of the specific conference he has registered for. C & H will publish the SEC 98 proceedings and the CD-ROM. Abstracts of all accepted papers will be available on the WWW prior to Congress. A password will be provided to all registered participants for online access to accepted full papers.

Mr. Brauer was happy with the Congress scheme. He welcomed the involvement of young people and the European Youth Parliament and supports Mr. Aiken's proposal that contact should be maintained with everyone who has submitted a paper.

Mr. Rosenfeld had ill feelings due to the fact that IFIP’s Publisher would not publish all Congress proceedings. He observed a substantial list of Russian and other East European submissions and wondered whether there will be enough support for their participation. Mr. Hoerbst responded that the IFIP Publisher would publish the CD-ROM and the SEC 98 proceedings and that sponsorship will be provided from the European Commission and hopefully from other sources.

Mr. Goyal advised the organizers to inform IFIP’s members of all accepted papers. In the case of India this will help in generating local funds for travel support to presenters of accepted papers.

Mr. Johnson recommended that a one page Congress 98 promotion leaflet is prepared and sent to the editors of IFIP Member society journals. Mrs. Toth responded that this is already done.

The President wished to know what is being done to prevent "no shows". Mr. Grafendorfer informed that accepted papers would be included in the proceedings only if the author is registered. Mr. von Solms cautioned of people submitting papers and not registering and Mrs. Hammond shared the INTERACT 97 experience whereby authors were requested to have early bird registration in order to include their paper in the conference proceedings. Mrs. Hammond also observed that the ratio between male and female speakers is very disproportionate and the organizers should encourage women presenters. Mr. Hoerbst assured that a woman would address Congress during the Opening.

The Congress 2000 OC Vice-chair, Mr. Zhou, presented a plan for the organization of the 16^th IFIP World Computer Congress in Beijing, China. The Congress dates are 21 – 25 August 2000. The venue would be the Beijing International Convention Center with a seating capacity of its Theater Hall of up to 3,000 persons and with many multifunctional Halls. The proposed headquarters hotel is connected by an internal passage to the Congress venue and is available for the IFIP GA and related meetings. Other hotels with an attractive variety of prices would be available. Shuttle buses will provide useful connection to/from the Congress venue.

The Congress is hosted by the leading national societies in the field of information processing, namely the Chinese Institute of Electronics, the China Computer Federation and the Chinese Institute of Communications. Congress is supported by the Chinese Government and also by various national and local institutions and organizations.

Congress 2000 is planned as an umbrella organization of pre and post congress tutorials, exhibition, technical visits and 8 parallel conferences in the following fields:

• Computer applications in manufacturing and management
• Communication technologies
• Artificial intelligence and neural networks
• Signal processing
• Software: theory and practice
• ICCAD and ASIC
• Computers in education
• Computer and network security

Prof. Sha chairs the OC, which would operate on the basis of functional units and its members would maintain liaison with the organizers of the 8 conferences. Early bird registrations (by 1 May) are currently estimated at USD 495 and on-site registrations at USD 580. Registrations will include a conference reception and banquet, access to all conferences, tutorials and other functions and a CD-ROM with all Congress proceedings. The hard copy proceedings would be charged extra. Mainland Chinese participants would pay half the price and the other half would be compensated by a government grant. Students would be charged USD 350 which would not include the reception and banquet.

For the production of the Congress 2000 proceedings the organizers are considering a similar to Congress 98 scheme with an additional proposal to have hard copies of the Congress proceedings available only by way of individual orders received prior to the Congress.

Plans are currently developing around two participation estimates:

• Conservative (800 foreigners and 1,200 locals)
• Optimistic (1,000 foreigners and 1,500 locals)

Further progress is envisaged as follows:

Task 				Deadline 			

Appointment of IPC Chair 	C 98 in Manchester
Consultations on Conference 	Co-chairs C 98 in Manchester
Appointments of all OC members 	by GA 98 in Budapest
1st Announcement available 	31 August 98 (for Congress 98 participants)
1st Call for Papers 		1 March 99
Extended abstracts deadline 	1 February 2000
Notification of Authors 	1 March 2000
Camera-Ready copies and
Early bird registrations 	1 May 2000
Final Program 			1 June 2000

With the understanding that many of the issues will have to be additionally clarified Mr. Zhou concluded his presentation on the plans for IFIP Congress 2000.

Council APPLAUDED.

The President informed Council that following a Chinese proposal, which was approved by Executive Board, he is pleased to appoint Professor Ernest S. Kuh as the IPC Chair of IFIP Congress 2000 in Beijing. Mr. Kuh was previously Chair of the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences and Dean of the College of Engineering at the University of California, Berkeley. Following a distinguished career he retired in 1993 and currently holds the title of Professor in the Graduate School at Berkeley.

There would be two IPC Vice-chairs. Professor Yang Fuqing, Head of the Department of Computer Science and Technology of Peking University, is the Vice-chair from China. Mr. Bauknecht will consult with two IFIP representatives and then he will announce the other Vice-chair.

Mr. Bauknecht advised that the IPC would have to decide on the way it will function and to establish its rules of procedure. At the same time it would be expected to follow IFIP’s guidance. In this respect Council recommends IPC to solicit full papers and not extended abstracts. Another recommendation is to have the Final Program ready earlier than currently planned by OC.

Messrs. Johnson and Rosenfeld were keen to have visible evidence of the Congress proceedings and to have them as archival documents. Messrs. Hoerbst and Glasson considered the target of 800 foreigners to be rather high. Mr. Hoerbst shared the concern about extended abstracts. Mr. Ausiello regretted that a theory track is not considered.

(Please also refer to Agenda item 3.12).

Mr. Guy informed Council that two excellent bids were received from Israel and Canada. The proposed sites would have to be visited by representatives of the IFIP Congress Committee, probably in late July 98. Both Members will be requested to present their bids to GA 98 and then GA will vote to select the site of Congress 2002.

Mr. Glasson reiterated his recommendation at GA 97 that IFIP should change its terminology by referring to invitations to host an IFIP Congress instead of bids.

Council was pleased with the two proposals and trusts the societies from Israel and Canada would be actively involved in future IFIP activities.

3.8 Membership Classes

Mr. Goldsworthy referred to his written report and recalled that during GA 97 a proposal was made by Mr. B. Shriver (USA) for a new category of IFIP Full member – International Professional Society (IPS). A Task group was established by the President to consider possible IPS criteria and the implications of this proposal and to report back to Council and GA.

Mr. Goldsworthy reported that the group has tried to outline the possible criteria. It considers that it is fundamentally important to keep the American societies within the IFIP family. Not many other societies will see themselves as international and therefore a generic change may not be a wise idea. Multiple membership was rejected. The introduction of a Full Affiliate member category is an option, which could be considered. Before any further steps are made the Group recommends that FOCUS should be formally asked what they consider as an appropriate solution. The Group would then take account of the US Member’s proposed solution and would prepare a recommendation for GA 98.

The President felt that the group should continue working in parallel.

Mr. Rosenfeld was left with the impression that Mr. Shriver had expressed a FOCUS position. He wondered why FOCUS was not asked for an official position after GA 97. Mr. Aiken explained that he has tried to act as a facilitator. The attitude until now was to present the proposal, get a reaction from IFIP and react back. Mr. Aiken would be happy to go back with IFIP’s view but he has to understand the parameters. He feels that IFIP does not want to create a new category that applies only to the American societies. It seems to him that IFIP is sympathetic to the goals but wants to find how this would best work. Affiliate membership is one possibility. Mr. Aiken thinks that if a Full Affiliate membership is considered as a workable solution than this very well may be the key to the issue. He cannot say what will happen with the future US National representation.

The President stressed that a strong US National representation in IFIP is essential and his understanding is that it is difficult to have alternative representation to ACM and IEEE CS. At the same time, if IEEE CS wishes to go another way IFIP cannot prevent it leaving FOCUS.

Mr. Morris explained that the Task Group wanted to be positive about the idea of the proposal. A conclusion to draw is that both members want to be separately involved in IFIP. If IFIP wishes both societies to be involved then IEEE CS could be offered the possibility to become an Full Affiliate Member. A possible condition for Full Affiliate membership could be that the society must consist of individual members. If such an approach is adopted then other societies could also become Full Affiliate members in future.

Mr. Johnson recalled that Council decided against multiple membership. He felt there should be full commitment of the US to work for the ideals of IFIP. Mr. Johnson would be willing to consider the "one country - one subscription- one vote" principle extended to accommodate several people from a specific country as observers during GA. Messrs. Brauer and Goyal stressed that Germany and India are firmly against multiple membership.

Mr. Rosenfeld explained that the US is very supportive of IFIP and Mr. Aiken thought it unproductive to link commitments to IFIP with the IPS issue.

Mr. von Solms thought it is advisable to encourage more members in IFIP. Mr. Granado believed that one way to encourage America to be more active in IFIP is to have an arrangement whereby both ACM and IEEE CS are represented. Mr. Bollerslev referred to a previous statement of the President concerning equal treatment and wondered whether an exception could be made in this particular case for an Affiliate Full member.

In light of the debate, the President requested Mr. Aiken to discuss the issue with FOCUS at an early convenience and invite their feedback with a formal proposal for an action plan with a preferred solution.

In parallel, the President suggested to consult with IFIP Full Members on the IPS issue and the option for an Affiliate Full Member. Mr. Johnson was not in favor of a scheme allowing multiple representation with two votes and two subscriptions and was against making a special case for the IPS. The President appointed Mr. Johnson as a member of the Task Group and requested the Group to advise him on appropriate action.

Mr. Aiken informed Council that IEEE CS would formally withdraw from FOCUS at the end of 98.

3.9 Professional Qualifications

Mr. Samways reported that the Working Party on Harmonization of Professional Standards was constituted at GA 97. Its activity aims to develop a document, which clearly sets out the standards of tertiary education, experience or practice, ethics and continuing education that a customer might expect from a practitioner offering services to the public.

[Please note that detailed information about the Working Party including a survey, process steps, organization and contact data, is published in the March 98 issue of the IFIP Newsletter available online at http://www.ifip.or.at]

Mr. Samways recalled that this activity is carried out under the supervision of the TC 3 Chair with Mr. I. Mitchell as Chair of the Working Party. Unfortunately, the replies from IFIP Members to the circulated memorandum and survey were very few.

Mr. Morris admitted that he never quite understood what was the intention of this work. Mr. Samways responded that the actual intention is to define the minimum requirement of what IT professionals (practitioners) should be.

3.10 Strategic Planning

Mr. Goldsworthy reported that the following list of actions was discussed by EB:

• Obtain from member societies their identification of the three most important needs they wanted satisfied by IFIP, and then follow up on ideas.
• Establish an IFIP electronic shop in which products from IFIP or its member societies can be offered for sale.
• Set up a conference diary to which all member societies can post entries for any event of international interest.
• IFIP to offer publishing books for member societies on a shared royalty basis.
• IFIP to maintain lists of email lists available within IFIP member societies to be used by other member societies for marketing purposes.
• IFIP to maintain a worldwide list of SIGs with URLs and emails for publicity purposes.
• To appoint a New Initiatives Manager to implement what was proposed by GA 97.
• To act on other recommendations made during GA 97.

Mr. Rosenfeld pointed out that the same list was proposed in Canela. Mr. Goldsworthy said that Action 1 was done but not all Members responded to the President’s letter. EB decided not to pursue Actions 2 and 4. The IFIP Secretariat has progressed activities in the spirit of Action 5. The TC Forum would be expected to recommend actions with respect to 3 and 6.

Mr. Aiken reminded that FOCUS had proposed an idea to consider using the services of a professional marketing consultant on improving relationship management. The President requested Mr. Aiken to come up with a more detailed description of the activities such a consultant would be expected to do.

Mr. Johnson was pleased to see the list and wondered whether the TC Forum could give any further clarification with respect to Action 7. In his opinion, it is important to identify the body, presumably AMB, responsible for the action and to identify an appropriate person to do the job. Mr. Aiken referred to the Bratislava Minutes and said that TA was supposed to advance this issue. The President offered to put it on EB agenda in order to consider its implementation.

Mr. Johnson referred to Action 6 and said that CEPIS is developing a list of European SIGs and would be happy to offer this list to IFIP when completed.

Finally, in view of the limited response to the President’s letter, Mr. Goldsworthy recommended that the President should write again to IFIP members society presidents asking them to submit a list of three proposals for consideration by GA 98.

3.11 Treasurer’s Report

Mr. Khakhar drew attention to his report and informed Council that the 1997 accounts were reviewed by the IFIP Auditor in February 1998 in Vienna.

The 1997 Result, after amortisation and depreciation according to approved policies and after Special Funds Provisions, is a surplus of 99,449 CHF, which is in accord with his forecast of CHF 100K at GA 97. This Result moves IFIP’s funds to a new peak level.

Compared to 1996, the 1997 Result shows an increase in Income of 4% (irrespective of the Congress 96 accounts) while Expenses declined 5%. (mainly due to a reduction in Administrative Secretariat and Support expenses).

The Final Result, after Special Funds Provision of 143 K CHF, is an increase in IFIP’s General Fund by 99 K CHF, or 7%, to 1.499 K CHF. The latter amount equals 4.5 times the actual - and reduced - expense level in 1997 and thus meets the target of 4.0 times established last year.

Key figures for the last five years are:

(Amounts in K CHF) 1997 1996 1995 1994 1993

Income 		   570   646  606  513  567 
Expenses 	   327   345  447  576  569 
Result 		   243   300  159  -63   -2 
Assets 	 	  2156  1889 1520 1380 1421 
Liabilities 	   138   126   58   77   55 
Funds 		  2017  1763 1462 1303 1366 

The Total Income of 570 K CHF is much better than the budgeted 498 K CHF. Income from Return on Assets, managed by SBC London since 1990, is 4 K CHF and is far less than the actual return of 33 K CHF in 1996. Dues from Members were slightly below budget. Royalties from Publications increased by 22 K CHF, or 12%, to 206 K CHF. Proceeds from TC Events increased from 41 K CHF in 1996 to 97 K CHF. The guaranteed fee of 100 K CHF from Congress 96 is not yet paid to IFIP.

Total Expenses were 327 K CHF or 36% below budget and 5% below the 1996 level. This is due to savings in communications expenses, President’s Reserve and Technical Support. The total Secretariat expenses for 1997 were 252 K CHF or 15% below the allocated budget.

Expenses of the 13 Technical Committees were in total 48% below the budgeted amount but show considerable variations. 9 TCs had positive TC Fund balance available for 1997, and 3 TCs spent part of this balance during 1997. 8 TCs increased their Funds balance during 1997 while 3 TCs decreased it. For 1998, 9 TCs have positive Fund balances available, totalling 392 K CHF. The Technical Support expenses were 18 K CHF or 69% below budget relating to AMB, TA and DCSC.

During 1997 two new funds were generated - Pension Fund and Special Activities Fund. The pension fund is to be invested to secure adequate pensions for the IFIP staff while the Special Activities Fund was created to meet requests made during GA 97 for initiating new activities of benefit to IFIP member societies.

The Final Result, after Special Funds Provision of 143 K CHF, is an increase in IFIP’s General Fund by 99 K CHF, or 7%, to 1,499K CHF.

Council unanimously ENDORSED the 1997 accounts for final approval by GA 98.

With respect to budget 98 adopted by GA 97, the Treasurer reported that the two new funds mentioned above were included. No other adjustments are proposed.

Council unanimously APPROVED.

With respect to preparations for the 1999 Budget, Mr. Khakhar will keep in mind the 97 Result and the 98 Budget. All budget holders are invited to submit comments and recommendations in written form not later than 1 June.

Mr. Aiken wished to know more about Return on Assets. The Treasurer informed that the IFIP Portfolio is managed professionally by SBC London. The only influence IFIP has is in determining the level of risk. Following agreement in Canela, a middle level risk scheme was authorized. Mr. Granado clarified that due to the low return some actions were initiated such as adding shares to the bonds portfolio. Before, IFIP investments were with fixed interest and now they are with variable interest. Some cash was transferred from the IFIP accounts to the portfolio capital. The Treasurer added that the Return on Assets was disappointingly low in 97 but, hopefully, this will change during the current year.

3.12 Technical Assembly

The TA Chair drew attention to his report and to the various issues that were discussed during the TA meeting in Manchester.

Mr. Johnson had delivered a presentation on CEPIS activities and how they relate to IFIP’s technical work. The TC Forum had met prior to TA and Mr. Glasson had reported that the TC Chairs were disappointed that they could not meet with MC members. New TC review procedures together with a revised form of reports to Council and GA are suggested. A new structure of the TA meetings is recommended so as to amplify the focus of TA on scientific/technical issues. Future TA meetings will accommodate two presentations by TC Chairs on the scientific and technical developments in their field instead of the usual TC reports to TA. Mrs. Hammond will succeed Mr. Glasson as the new TC Forum Facilitator. The TC Forum will give further consideration and propose actions with respect to the New Conference Initiative.

The President thanked Mr. Glasson for his work as TC Forum Facilitator and wished good luck to Mrs. Hammond as the new Facilitator for the next one-year term.

With respect to management, Mr. Brauer reported the following TA decisions:

• WG 5.7 was renamed as Integrated Production Management
• WG 5.8 was abolished
• A new WG 6.10 was endorsed and the TC 6 Chair is asked to circulate its Aims and Scope to all TC Chairs
• TA endorsed minor changes to the Aims and Scope of WG 11.4

Final decision will be made in Budapest with respect to a TC 13 proposal for a new working group. In the meantime, the TC 13 Chair is requested to circulate the detailed proposal and the suggested Aims and Scope.

Mr. Brauer informed that the TC 12 Chair had delivered a presentation on Artificial Intelligence, its applications and his intentions to reorganize TC 12. Intelligent Systems is the proposed new TC name. Other proposals include a new item in the TC’s Scope related to development of AI techniques as part of information processing technologies to enable and advance practical applications. A new WG on Intelligent Information Management is being considered. These proposals will have to be presented for approval in Budapest.

With respect to Congress 2000, Mr. Brauer informed Council that Prof. Li had made a detailed presentation with respect to the Congress program, which was followed by intensive discussion. TA felt the conferences should be very focused. Not all conferences need to have the same duration as the Congress. The IPC should give some thought how to incorporate Computer Science Fundamentals in the Program. All TCs are encouraged to assist the program design.

The TA Chair said that there was a controversial discussion with respect to Mr. Rosenfeld’s report on behalf of the Committee on New Initiatives. TA felt that the proposals either fall within the DCSC scope of activity or were not considered by TA to be of high priority. Mr. Rosenfeld added that TA deferred any decision. The President endorsed TA’s approach with respect to the issue. So as to give a chance to those Council members who had not attended TA to be briefed on the Committee's proposals he requested Mr. Rosenfeld to present a brief summary at the end of Council (please refer to agenda item 3.17).

Finally, the TA Chair informed that Mr. Nedkov had presented a UNESCO proposal for modular curriculum development. TA felt that the current outline needs improvements. IFIP should enter into contractual relations with UNESCO so as to influence the framework proposal for the curriculum design and to promote its cooperation with UNESCO. The IFIP-UNESCO Liaison Officer pointed out that if IFIP accepts the contract then it would actually be expected to propose a more holistic and representative framework compared to the current initial draft. Mr. Brauer added that Mr. Bernard Levrat is proposed to head the IFIP team, which would be responsible for this work and that the IFIP President will make the necessary contact.

3.13 Activity Management Board

Mr. Aiken said that as new AMB Chair he has received excellent support from the IFIP Secretariat. He is firm in asserting the newly adopted Event Approval Guidelines and forms. At the same time, he felt there is a necessity to make the process more user-friendly and AMB has worked towards this end. Draft documents were produced and discussed during the AMB meeting in Manchester. It is his understanding that these documents were accepted. The AMB Chair will hold another meeting in Manchester after Council with Messrs. Glasson, Johnson and the IFIP Secretariat to consider further steps to improve the event management process.

The AMB Chair invited the Executive Director to inform Council of the statistics with respect to the IFIP events in 1997.

Mr. Nedkov informed Council of the following statistics:

There were 3 recent revisions of the Event Guidelines, forms and procedures. It normally takes some time to stabilize the system and to adapt to the new requirements, however, currently the process is running fairly smoothly and some results are in place. The number of events in 1997 in which IFIP was involved as a Full or Main Sponsor has increased compared to the previous two years. More indicative, however, is the fact that contacts between event organizers, technical committees, and the Secretariat lead to an improved management overview and the financial results show an upturn. In fact, 1997 is a peak year in terms of income from event proceeds, 70% of which go to TC funds. 1998 also promises to be good.

Mr. Glasson expressed the opinion that IFIP should be considered as a facilitator of events. This has to be reflected in the documents and the terminology used for event management. An online set of electronic documents and forms should be the backbone of the management system. There is a tremendous improvement in the forms over the last few years and immediately after Council he and others will look into a scheme for developing a new attitude towards event management.

Mr. Samways referred to the new grants policy approved at GA 97 and informed that for one particular TC 3 event the decision not to provide grants for organizational expenses but as seed money to support DC participants has created a problem. Mr. Aiken responded that this is a policy matter and as AMB Chair he is expected to follow the Guidelines. Moreover, the grant in question was approved only after GA 97 and the organizers were well aware of the process. Nonetheless, a compromise was reached.

3.14 Technical Committees

Mr. Ausiello reported that TC1 held its first meeting in Bologna on July 6, 1997 in conjunction with the ICALP conference and the Silver Jubilee of the European Association for Theoretical Computer Science. Prof. Roberto Gorrieri was appointed TC 1 Secretary. Vice chair appointments will be made in the near future. The next TC1 meeting will be held on 29 March 98 in Lisbon. A second meeting is likely to be organized in Brno, the Czech Republic, in conjunction with MFCS 98. The TC 1 WWW site is available at http://hermes.dis.uniroma1.it/Ifip-TC1/.

During the first meeting and thereafter TC 1 proceeded to evaluate the performance of its Working Groups and to investigate the formation of new groups. Areas of interest are computational logic, approximation algorithms, term rewriting, theoretical issues related to very large information systems and bi-dimensional languages. Possibilities for cooperation with other TCs will be investigated. Formal methods in security and borderline areas to TC 6 and TC 7 activities are of interest to TC 1. The institution of a prize for theoretical results with strong impact on applications will be further considered. Initiatives will continue to promote the participation of young researchers from disadvantaged countries in scientific events.

IFIP Members from China, Japan, Poland, Portugal and the United States have nominated their representatives to TC 1. The rest of the TC 1 membership remains essentially the same as the former SG 14. All WGs are active. A new Chair was appointed for WG 1.3 and Best Paper Awards are promoted by WG 1.4. Further thought would be given how to continue with these awards in future.

The President thanked the TC 1 Chair for his report and said that he looks forward to the proposals for new WGs and more theory oriented activities within IFIP.

Mr. Kurki-Suonio reported that the last TC 2 meeting was held in Konstanz, Germany on 5 – 6 June 97 and was attended by 15 national representatives and WG Chairs. The next meeting is scheduled for 12 – 13 June 98 in Shelter Island, NY, USA in conjunction with a WG 2.2/2.3 conference on Programming Concepts and Methods.

The location of the TC 2 homepage is at http://www.cs.tut.fi/~rks/ifip/tc2.html

There are new representatives from Poland and India. Inactive representation/no representation is registered for Australia, France, Israel, Italy, Portugal, Slovakia, South Africa and Sweden.

Most TC 2 working groups are active. WG 2.5 has a new Chair. WG 2.9 has a new Chair and a new Secretary. Three books were published with Chapman & Hall in 97 and one has appeared in 98. A new conference on Software Architecture will be held in 99 with one of its objectives being to explore whether a TC 2 WG should be established in this field.

Mr. Brauer wished to know the involvement of TC 2 in the FM 99 Conference in Toulouse. Messrs. Ausiello and Kurki-Suonio reported that there had been some attempts to establish a more formal relationship. So far, contacts are kept on the personal level rather than on the level of TCs. The TC 2 Chair said that there was a long discussion within the TC with respect to this conference and the conclusion was that as individuals many would be happy to be involved in the conference, however, TC 2 showed hesitation to be involved formally.

Mr. Brauer is a member of the FM 99 program committee but not as an IFIP representative. In Bratislava he was left with the impression that the TC Chairs are very interested to get involved in this conference but the current discussion does not confirm such an interest.

Mr. B. Samways informed that the 48^th meeting of TC 3 was held on 24 August 97 in Harare, Zimbabwe. The next meeting is scheduled for 29 – 30 August 98 in Vienna, Austria. Future meetings were planned for New Zealand in 99 and Denmark in 2000. There are changes and additions to the TC 3 membership from Australia, Brazil, China, India, Italy, New Zealand, Portugal, the USA and a new acting Chair of WG 3.3. A TC 3 Policy document will be issued soon.

TC 3 working groups are active and good progress is made in maintaining the TC 3 international position. The committee is involved in a project for a database of the Mediterranean treasures and the development of an Elementary School IT Curriculum, both under the aegis of UNESCO. Continued involvement in the International Olympiads in Informatics is envisaged. The TC 3 Journal on Education and Information Technologies is in its 3^rd year and needs further support. It is gratifying to hear of the EB decision that IFIP will be in a position to subsidize the journal for 2 years. In cooperation with CEPIS a Summer school for Teachers will be organized in July 98 in Prague. Plans are underway for the next World Conference on Computers in Education, which will be hosted by the Danish Member of IFIP in the year 2001. The TC 3 Homepage can be found at http://www.ge-dip.etat-ge.ch/cip/ifip/welcome.html. Financially TC 3 needs greater support than other TCs as education in general has always had limited funding. The TC 3 Chair believed that it would be useful to continue the "Guidelines for Good Practice" series for which IFIP financial support would be needed.

The President wondered whether there would be WCCE 2001 attendance problems as Denmark is an expensive country and registration fees would likely be high judging from the IFIP/Sec 97 experience. Mr. Samways was not aware of any problems.

Mr. G. Doumeingts reported that the last TC 5 Meeting was held on 4 November 97 in Detroit. Unfortunately, CAPE 97 was cancelled but this helped not to lose significant funds due to low attendance. The next meeting is scheduled for 12 September 98 in Trento, Italy in conjunction with the PROLAMAT Conference.

TC5 has officially 35 members and 23 countries are represented in its work. Several replacements and new nominations were made. Confirmations are expected from Spain and Sweden. A new individual member from France was accepted. TC 5 needs a clearer definition and procedure for accepting future individual members.

The most important assignment during 98 and 99 is to complete the TC 5 restructuring process. There are currently 9 Working Groups and obvious possibilities exist for optimizing their scope of activities and interaction. Some decisions have been taken (please refer to Agenda item 3.12). Further action should be considered such as a possible merger between WG 5.2 and WG 5.3 and the role and place of WGs 5.4, 5.6 and 5.11. WGs 5.8, 5.10 and 5.12 are in good shape.

The President thanked the TC 5 Chair for his report and invited him and the TC 5 Officers to consider energetic steps to lead TC 5 out of the current difficult situation.

Mr. Brauer reported on behalf of Mr. Casaca, the new TC 6 Chair, who had to leave Manchester just prior to Council. The last TC 6 meeting was on 12 - 13 October 97 in Sofia, Bulgaria. The next meeting is scheduled for 3 - 4 April in Ladenburg, Germany. Brazil, Israel, Ireland, the Netherlands, Singapore and Thailand are not currently represented on TC 6. TC 6 is in good shape and organizes numerous events and publications with good reputation. A review of the strategic issues related to TC 6 is pending and will be ready for GA 98.

Mr. Khakhar informed that TC 6 would proceed with an experiment for an IFIP Press and that Networks 98 would convene in Bangalore, India in cooperation with ICCC.

Mr. P. Kall reported that no business meetings were held since GA 97. The next TC 7 meeting is scheduled for 21 April 98 in Chemnitz, Germany in conjunction with a WG 7.2 event. Singapore nominated a new representative and India withdrew its representative informing that a new nomination is pending. So far there is no contact with the Portuguese representative.

Mr. B. Glasson said that no TC 8 business meeting was held since GA 97 and, therefore, his report is very short and concentrates on trends worth noting.

These include:

• An alternative publishing method is investigated for the proceedings of the joint WG 8.2/8.6 Conference in December 98.
• Several TC 8 WGs are organizing meetings prior to large international IS conferences. Other WGs will follow suit.
• There is a continued problem with US organizations accepting liability for IFIP events.
• WGs 8.1 and 8.4 had to cancel events for the first time due to lack of quality submissions.
• WG 8.5, in assistance with WG 8.4, is involved with the organization of the Congress 98 Tele-cooperation track.

Mr. Goldsworthy wished to know the nature of the problem related to the liability for IFIP events. The TC 8 Chair responded that this mainly has to do with insurance related issues but also stretches to guarantees of various sorts. Mr. Nedkov advised that in accord with the IFIP Guidelines event organizers are advised to check if the organizing university or research institute has a blanket insurance that could cover the IFIP event. Alternatively, organizers are expected to include the insurance costs in the conference budget. The President considered this issue deserves further attention and an IFIP blanket insurance policy should be explored.

Mr. Kurki-Suonio reported on behalf of the TC 9 chair and mentioned that no meeting was held since GA 97. The next meeting is scheduled for 29-30 August 98 in Geneva, Switzerland in conjunction with the 5^th World Conference on Human Choice and Computers. There is a new TC 9 member from Poland and member societies currently not represented are encouraged to nominate representatives.

All TC 9 WGs and SIGs are active. The Namur Award was awarded to Gunilla Bradley (S) at the time of the WG 9.2 meeting in January. WG 9.2 incorporates SIG 9.2.1 on Disabilities (co-operation between SIG 9.2.1 and WG 13.3 is encouraged) and SIG 9.2.2 on Ethics. WG 9.4 on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries maintains a long list of members throughout the world. A widely distributed newsletter serves as an excellent vehicle for the exchange of ideas and solutions. In February 98 this WG organized a conference in Thailand. The aims and scope of WG 9.5 will be reconsidered during the next TC 9 meeting. WG 9.7 is developing guidelines for a curriculum in the history of computing and also promotes the concept of "Pioneer Days" during IFIP World Congresses. A preliminary draft of the aims and scope of SIG 9.0.1 on Intellectual Property Rights and Free Flow was prepared by K. Brunnstein and its first meeting is scheduled during KnowRight 98.

Mr. Laprie reported that no meeting was held since GA 97. The next TC 10 meeting will convene in conjunction with the IFIP Congress in Vienna and Budapest. The exact date and location will be decided soon.

Most working groups are active with many scheduled future events. WG 10.5 has a new Chair. The overall financial situation of the TC is good. A one-day workshop on Computer Systems Technology and Engineering is proposed in conjunction with Congress 98. The program would consist of invited presentations proposed by the WG Chairs.

Mr. von Solms reported that TC 11 had a very good year. The TC 11 Vice-chair, Mr. Posch, expertly manages the TC 11 web pages at http://www.ifip.tu-graz.ac.at/TC11/.

A very successful TC 11 meeting was organized in Copenhagen in conjunction with IFIP/Sec 97. Mr. Batchelor (Canada) was re-elected as TC 11 Secretary. An Appointments Committee was constituted to prepare the election for a new chair and vice-chair during the next TC 11 meeting in August 98 in Vienna. Both the current Chair and Vice-Chair will stand for re-election. The representatives of Norway, Portugal, Ireland, India and Singapore did not attend the 97 Annual meeting and it is assumed that these countries are currently not represented on TC 11. New appointments were made for representatives from Poland and Zimbabwe.

IFIP/Sec 97 was very successful with an attendance of 154 delegates from 29 countries. The sponsorship fee was paid to IFIP. IFIP/Sec 98 will be part of WCC 98. No IFIP/Sec conference will take place in 99. Three working groups plan conferences in Amsterdam in 99 where the TC 11 meeting that year will probably convene. IFIP/Sec 2000 is scheduled for China and the TC 11 Chair has confirmed there is no problem on the part of TC 11 to integrate it with Congress 2000. IFIP/Sec 2001 will be in France and IFIP/Sec 2002 in New Zealand.

All WGs are active. Four sets of proceedings were published with C & H during 97 and TC 11 is happy with these publications. TC 11 encourages its WGs to establish WG events in addition to their participation in the IFIP/Sec series of conferences. In the next two years TC 11 and its WGs may have 5 additionally established conferences.

Finally, Mr. von Solms reported of the passing away of one of the TC 11 founders, Dr. Harold Highland.

Mr. Goldsworthy wished to know whether TC 11 would change its decision to hold the IFIP/Sec 2002 conference in New Zealand if the NZCS did not pay its annual dues. The TC 11 Chair reported that TC 11 has had some bad experience with Greece as he had expected that all their back dues are covered by revenues from TC 11 conferences in Greece. Now he finds that Greece is on the potential list of expulsion. He would seek Council’s and GA’s advice should any problems surface with other organizers of the IFIP/Sec conferences.

Mr. Aiken wished to know what is the reason for the high registration fees for IFIP/Sec 97. Mr. Bauknecht said he took part in that conference and would hardly consider attending a future IFIP/Sec conference if the registration fees remain that high. Mr. von Solms responded that the Copenhagen conference made a large profit and said that the level of the registration fees to a great extend is decided by the organizers, in this specific case the Danish member of IFIP.

Mr. Neumann reported that no meeting was held since GA 97. The last TC 12 meeting in Nagoya, Japan decided to discontinue WG 12.1, WG 12.3 and WG 12.4. The mainstream activities in AI are carried by other well-established organizations with long tradition. This fact is recognized and TC 12 will have to reconsider its future place and performance. There is a need for merging and bringing AI to application areas. A new WG is proposed in the field of AI methods in structuring information and many of the management issues related to TC 12 will be forwarded for decision during GA 98. TC 12 needs active members and will be involved in the next two IFIP Congresses.

The President said that TC 12 is a major concern to IFIP and Mr. Rosenfeld wished to know whether one year is enough to generate positive results. Mr. Neuman responded that GA members would be in a position to evaluate the TC 12 status and prospects in Budapest.

(Please also refer to Agenda item 3.12)

Mrs. Hammond referred to her report and mentioned that the 13^th Meeting of TC 13 took place from 18 to 21 February 98 in Amsterdam. The exact location of the 14^th Meeting in September 98 is still not decided.

25 Members of IFIP are represented on TC 13. Most recent additions include a member from Poland and a change in the Japanese representation. India will soon have a replacement while the Canadian and CLEI representatives have failed to attend recent meetings and there is no contact with the Chinese representative.

The 13^th Meeting decided to recommend to the IFIP President to re-appoint the current TC 13 Chair for another three-year term beginning in September 98. Mr. Shackel was re-appointed as Secretary for a second term beginning September 98. Messrs. Karat (USA) and Rauterberg (CH) were appointed as TC 13 Vice-Chairs.

The TC 13 Chair requested permission to have non-voting representatives at TC 13 meetings. The Secretary said there is no problem as this issue is already regulated by IFIP Bylaw 4.3.2 "Membership".

The 6^th INTERACT 97 was held on 14 – 18 July 1997 in Sydney, Australia. It was very successful with a total of 366 participants from 23 countries. Several WGs held their business meetings during the conference. All submissions were refereed. The Conference proceedings were published by C & H and include a total of 140 presentations. Special thanks for this successful event are due to Mr. Shackel who acted as TC 13 Chair for INTERACT 97 matters.

Most WGs are active and involved in the organization of events. Future events include the APCHI 98 conference in Japan for which DCSC and UNESCO support is solicited and INTERACT 99 in Edinburgh, UK.

Mrs. Hammond concluded that the overall TC 13 status is good and progress is expected in three major areas, namely, activity planning, information resources and external liaison. A TC 13 proposal to develop IFIP conference evaluation methods was submitted to EB for consideration.

The President thanked Mrs. Hammond for her report and congratulated TC 13 for the successful organization of the INTERACT 97 Conference.

3.15 Committee Reports

Mr. Johnson drew attention to his report on the PC meeting discussion.

The PC Chair has been in regular contact with C & H. Its sale to Kluwer Academic Publishers caused some uncertainty over the outcome of the negotiations for a new contract. Kluwer may intend to sell the C & H book series and has agreed to state their position on the IFIP contract in two weeks time. In this transition period great care will be needed to minimize disruption. Attention is drawn to the possible change of Web site for the templates and notes for authors. It was agreed that IFIP should consider providing a mirror-site if that would help authors.

The ambitious target set by C&H of GBP 495,000 was nearly accomplished in 97. The PC noted that low conference attendance frequently precedes poor sales although there are also conferences with restricted attendance and well selling proceedings. A TC 3 book on Information Technology: Supporting change through teacher education is on the Web and receives a significant number of hits but there is no clear evidence of the impact on sales. The PC welcomed the proposed use of email flyers for new books and it was suggested that all delegates at a conference be given a flyer for that conference with a request to pass it to their librarian for ordering. Following the proposal in Gramado guidelines on the use of IFIP ISBNs were prepared and issued by Mr. Nedkov.

Mr. Johnson informed that the PC meeting thought it advisable to conduct a study on comparative prices for conference proceedings, including those of IFIP, IEEE-CS and ACM. The results of the study should be available for GA 98. The PC Chair wished to know to whom the study should be commissioned. The President said that the PC was previously expected to do such studies. However, should the PC feel it does not have the experience or time, it should advise the President with regard to the possibility of involving an outside expert and the financial implications this may entail.

Mr. Johnson reported that he had agreed to prepare a paper outlining options for selling papers online, which should be ready for Budapest.

The PC Chair further reported that the PC meeting addressed the issue of royalty on bulk sales, which artificially raised the price to conference organizers in order to pay the royalty to IFIP. It was felt that the bulk sale royalty could be abolished but it was also recognized that another revenue stream should be identified to secure the GBP 27,000 for IFIP from bulk sales. Consideration was given to increasing the discount price for individuals to around 60% to encourage private purchases and it was noted that this was in line with IEEE-CS levels. Mr. Nedkov advised that further discussion and decision on these and other contractual issues is premature and the most important issue for IFIP right now is to establish contact with Kluwer and find out what their intentions are with respect to the IFIP series.

The President appointed a group consisting of Messrs. Johnson, Morris and Nedkov to establish contact and meet with the new Publisher.

Nothing to report.

Nothing to report.

Mr. Guy presented a paper he had prepared on issues relating to IFIP Congresses – their purpose, frequency and format, income and distribution of revenue, contractual and other financial considerations and recommendations to bidders.

Messrs. Glasson, Ausiello, von Solms and Mrs. Hammond expressed reservations with respect to some of the objectives and priorities described in the paper.

The President concluded that the paper is a personal opinion and a statement of Mr. Guy and not of the Congress Committee. The Secretary agreed and expressed an opinion that when the Congress Committee is re-appointed it should include persons with experience of running Congresses. Further, its Chairman should work with the Committee members and produce recommendations. Mr. Johnson suggested that, given the circumstances, there is no more that can be said and Council should proceed with the next item on its agenda.

Mr. Rosenfeld wished to know more of congress finances and what happens when hosts do not pay. Mr. Bollerslev responded that the Congress Guidelines should be updated by the end of May and this particularly relates to financial matters. A new sample contract for future congresses will have to be developed by the end of March. The Committee Chair is responsible for both items.

Mr. von Solms informed that Congress 98 is an umbrella organization with individual conferences and program committees. The IFIP SEC 98 conference is treated separately as an individual conference with its own registrations. Mr. Nedkov reminded that the Bratislava Council requested the Treasurer, AMB and the TC 11 Chair to consider the financial implications of IFIP/Sec as part of Congress 98.

Mr. Goyal referred to his report and mentioned that DCSC supported the distribution of 25 copies of the TC 3 publications on Information Technology: Supporting change through teacher education. CHF 1,500 were allocated for this purpose and free copies were already sent to Egypt, India, Hungary and South Africa. A grant of CHF 2,000 was disbursed in support of participants in the IFIP WG9.4 Conference on "Implementation and Evaluation of Information Systems in Developing Countries" held in February 98 in Bangkok, Thailand.

The DCSC Chair reported that the DCSC meeting in Manchester agreed to provide grants as follows:

• To allocate CHF 2,500 in support of Chinese participants in IFIP Congress 98.
• To allocate CHF 2,000 for inviting specialist(s) for the NETWORKS 98 Conference in Bangalore, India in June 98.
• To allocate CHF 2,000 towards travel support to Paper presenters for the July APCHI 98 conference in Japan.
• To support CLEI’s request for IFIP involvement in the forthcoming CLEI 98 Conference in Chile and to allocate CHF 2,000 towards travel support for an IFIP representative who would deliver a lecture on a topic of interest.
• To reserve CHF 4, 000 as a possible source of support for applications for Congress 98.

Mr. Goyal informed that during his meeting with the TC Chairs TCs were encouraged to identify IT experts who would be prepared to visit developing countries to deliver lectures and tutorials. Topics of interest are state-of-the-art technologies and emerging areas of technology. TCs are encouraged to organize more technical events in developing countries. IFIP Members in these countries can benefit by further inviting participants to deliver lectures and tutorials.

Mr. Brauer confirmed that it is important to identify an appropriate IFIP representative for the CLEI 98 conference in Chile and welcomed the DCSC recommendation.

Mr. Bollerslev clarified that with respect to the NETWORKS 98 Conference in India TC 6 should be requested to identify the IFIP representative and speaker as the grant is earmarked.

Mr. Samways queried whether there is a uniform list of all developing countries. Mr. Nedkov responded that various UN lists of developing countries exist such as LDCs, group of 77, the Africa and Latin American regions, emerging economies, etc. The President requested the Secretariat to inquire with the UN for a detailed list of countries termed as developing.

Council endorsed DCSC proposal for grant allocations.

Mr. Granado reported that the Treasurer’s report was reviewed by FC and the following items were highlighted with respect to the 1997 accounts:

• The WCC 96 receivable amount of CHF 100,000 was long overdue;
• Outstanding membership dues are CHF 66,98 K; out of these CHF 42,55 K were written off;
• The low Return on Assets of IFIP’s portfolio demanded corrective measures. These include a change in the mix of shares and bonds while keeping a low risk level. A change in the mix of fixed and variable interest rate applications and a cash transfer from IFIP’s current London account to the portfolio (with a capital increased from CHF 1,0 M to CHF 1,55 M) was also initiated;
• The Special Activities Fund with CHF 56,6 K generated from TC funds in order to meet the request of General Assembly for financing IFIP special activities;
• Administrative expenses were CHF 272 K, 29% below the budgeted CHF 383 K;
• TC related expenses dropped to CHF 55 K, 57% below the budgeted CHF 128 K.

With respect to the 1998 Amended Budget:

• The level of Bank deposits is readjusted from CHF 210 K to CHF 284 K;
• The creation of a special fund of CHF 56,6 K increased the Technical Support budget from CHF 50,0 K to CHF 106,6 K;
• A special fund provision of CHF 50 K was created for a Pension Fund and motivated an equivalent increase of our current account in London;
• A budget of CHF 41,6 K is planned for the Special Activities Fund provision for 1998;
• The cash flow management was put in place but financial results have yet to verify its accuracy;
• Due to the recovery of the Swiss economy and the consequent appreciation of the Swiss Franc, it was agreed to defer for a while the study on the best base currency for IFIP operations.

With these observations and the Treasurer's report in mind observations Council was invited to:

• Approve the 1997 accounts;
• Approve the 1998 amended budget;
• Recommend financial officers to be more attentive to the return on assets of our portfolio and to avoid a possible excess of liquidity;
• Recommend TC Chairmen to be attentive to their special funds;
• Recommend the implementation of activities to establish and secure the Pension Fund for the IFIP Administrative Staff;
• Approve a new fund policy on IFIP Reserves with a new established level of at least five times the annual operations' cost.

The FC Chair mentioned that the new level would guarantee IFIP’s operations against unexpected negative developments during which the income stream could drop drastically. The suggested level accounts for the congress cycles and the fact that membership dues, and to some extent royalties from publications, can be considered as the only relatively stable income sources. Messrs. Johnson, Khakhar and Aiken stressed that it is important to have a secure Income stream and activities to this end should be explored and encouraged. Mr. von Solms considered that the issue of royalties requires IFIP to be in business association with well-established publishers.

Council ENDORSED the FC recommendations.

(Please also refer to Agenda item 3.11)

Mr. Nedkov drew attention to his report and said that the relations with UNESCO are in very good form. IFIP Members, representatives and TC Chairs are kept well aware of the developments and are advised on possibilities for contacts and cooperation. IFIP was represented at the UNESCO General Conference, which made it possible to take an active part in the discussion and program implementation. IFIP was elected to the NGO-UNESCO Liaison Committee of nine members, representing the interests of all UNESCO associated NGOs vis-à-vis the UNESCO leadership.

Four project proposals were developed, coordinated and submitted to UNESCO for the following:

• The 15^th IFIP World Computer Congress;
• To assist the participation of specialists from developing countries in IFIP Events;
• To support subscriptions to the IFIP journal on education and information technologies;
• To develop a training package and communication tools.

Mr. Nedkov reported that a UNESCO contract proposal for modular curriculum development was submitted by him to the TC Chairs for consideration prior to the meetings in Manchester. This was discussed during the TA meeting (please refer to Agenda 3.12).

Mr. Morris advised that the new recipients of IFIP’s Silver Core and the Outstanding Service awards will have to be elected by GA 98. He will write to the TC Chairs inviting nominations for the OSA Award. He is also preparing a list of potential candidates who meet the criteria for the Silver Core Award and will seek opinion from IFIP’s TCs.

The President regretted that the scheduled MC meeting prior to Council was cancelled and there was no report on MC activities.

Mr. Guy informed that he has proceeded with the design of a Brochure with IFIP Statutory information with a quote for approximately CHF 3,000.

Mr. Bollerslev commented that he had expected to see a proposal for a new IFIP brochure to market IFIP at various meetings and events. The President recalled that GA 97 recommended to MC a procedure to solicit alternative proposals and on the basis of a review to select the most appropriate project. This was not followed and, therefore, it is not possible to make a decision. The MC Chair should be requested to follow the right sequence of action. Mr. Khakhar agreed and said that IFIP should have a strong MC. Mr. Samways reminded of earlier discussion concerning CNN reporting and IFIP leaflets.

Mr. Rosenfeld reported that printing of the March Newsletter had not been done in time for the Council meeting. The Newsletter circulation is approximately 3300 individual copies plus bulk mailings of approximately 1000 to Member societies and event organizers. The print run is 5000. All TC profiles have been completed except for TC11 (which will be done soon) and TC12 (which has never been stable enough to do). The Newsletter Editor requested TC chairs to tell him in advance how important and established are the events about which articles have been written.

An important issue is who will print the June Newsletter. Mr. Rosenfeld would normally ship it to the printer at the end of April, however, the person at Chapman & Hall who normally handled the printing has resigned. It has further been proposed that the Newsletter be produced in its electronic version only, with no printed version. Mr. Rosenfeld does not support such development and seeks Council's opinion on the issue.

Mr. Johnson said that PC shared the NL Editor’s disappointment that the March issue was not printed in time. The PC meeting favored moving towards an all-electronic form.

Messrs. Goldsworthy and Nedkov expressed opinion that while the online copy of the Newsletter is the preferred solution for fast, versatile and attractive information dissemination, the printed version remains a tangible marketing and information tool and its printing should not be abandoned. Council AGREED.

3.16 Future Meetings

The Secretary advised Council of the forthcoming meetings:

1998 General Assembly 	EB - Wednesday, September 2 (on ship)
			GA – Budapest, Hungary
			Saturday, September 5 – 8

1999 Council 		New Delhi, India 
			Sunday, February 28 – March 4

1999 General Assembly 	Kuala Lumpur (Cyberjaya), Malaysia
			Sunday, September 5 – 9

2000 Council 		open for invitations
			Sunday, March 5 – 9

General Assembly 	Beijing, China 
			26 – 29 August (provisional)

Mr. Ausiello recalled that last year Italy offered to host Council 99 in Rome. In view of regional considerations India was chosen to host that meeting and Italy was requested to reconsider another slot. The year 2000 is not the best for Rome and for this reason Mr. Ausiello would suggest a renewal of the invitation for 2001. A letter to this effect would be sent to the IFIP Secretariat.

3.17 Other Business

Further to the TA discussion (agenda item 3.12), the President requested Mr. Rosenfeld to briefly summarize the proposals of the Committee on New IFIP Initiatives.

Mr. Rosenfeld informed that three priority projects were identified – Lectureship Program, publication of Member Society reports and TC and WG state-of-the-art reports. A proposal for key papers or summaries for distribution to developing countries required further thought and this was also true for the proposal for grants for events in such countries. Other suggestions include hiring a consultant to recommend a relationship management function within IFIP, supplying IFIP proceedings to key libraries in IFIP Member developing countries, assisting INTERNET connections to IFIP Members in these countries and other.

Mr. Brauer recalled TA’s attitude with respect to these proposals. The President said that the purpose of this presentation was intended only to inform Council members who have not attended the TA meeting. Mr. Glasson recommended that the Special Projects topic should remain as an agenda item for future meetings.

3.18 Closing of Meeting

The President thanked everyone for contributing to the discussions. He reiterated his appreciation of the landmark university environment and of having had the opportunity to visit Old Trafford. Mr. Bauknecht once again thanked the British Computer Society, Mr. Johnson and all who had contributed and declared Council 98 in Manchester closed.