At the closing session of IFIP Congress '96 (see the article on page 1 of the December 1996 IFIP Newsletter), Dr. Dale Spender (AUS), a well known expert on language and communication, delivered a provocative address on the present revolution in education and learning. This was especially appropriate, because "Teleteaching '96" was one of the three
conferences included under the umbrella of the Congress (see the
following article). We print here selected parts of her talk.
The complete address can be found on the World Wide Web at
http://www.acs.org.au/ifip96.html
The biggest business of the future will be the education industry.
Never before has education as an enterprise been able to amass
such a dazzling array of talent. Never again will it be said that
those who can't do anything else can go into teaching. Education
is the industry of the future and where the hottest people will
want to be. And it is the new technologies that are launching
education. New partnerships are being forged; new and huge markets
are being found. And this is why education is the industry that
everyone will wish they had shares in.
The Education Revolution
We are in the throes of a revolution. Most of what we know about
teaching and learning is becoming increasingly inappropriate.
For the last five hundred years, teaching and learning have been
based mainly on book information, and while we may have developed
some pretty good theories and practices for doing education, and
for studying it, the print insights and habits won't transfer
to the digitized world. Teaching and learning "online"
are so transformed that it is not even possible to make the old
distinctions between teacher and learner.
As we move from a print culture to a digitized culture, we move
from stable information to moving information. Suddenly, it is
not the oldest information -- the longest lasting information
-- that is the most reliable and useful. It is the very latest
information that we now put the most faith in and which we will
pay the most for. Information is now a commodity, just like other
goods and services. This will be at the core of the educational
industry from now on.
Education will be about participating in the production of the
latest information. This is why education will have to be ongoing
throughout life and work. Every day there will be something new
that we will all have to learn in order to keep up, to be in the
know, to do our jobs, and to be members of the digital community.
Far from teaching a body of knowledge that will last for life,
the new generation of in- formation professionals will be required
to search out, add to, critique, "play with," and update
information daily and to make available the constant changes that
are occurring.
The Cyberteacher/Learner
I am prepared to "teach" my current research to others
who are interested in the topic -- who want to know where I am
up to. In order to participate in the global production of the
latest information in the area, I would even be willing to sell
my information to others who want it, just as I have sold books
in the past -- except that I no longer need a publisher. I could
indeed set myself up as an online teacher and make my course available
to the students of the world, a course which I could update daily
as I "learnt" more about the topic in interaction with
other cyberusers and other cyber sources. And I could do all this
from my own home; I don't need an institutional setting to become
a world teacher. But as I do research, learning and teaching on
line, the Internet allows me to be both teacher and student --
at the same time and on the same topic -- which is why the dividing
line between teaching and learning ceases to be useful.
The most significant development that is taking place, and which
needs to be grasped at every level, is that information is now
becoming interactive. Anyone who has access to it can make a contribution,
can become an information producer. Whereas once you had to be
the published author to produce information, the way is now open
to all. And this means there are no established authorities any
more. Teachers and students are doing the same thing, are sharing
the same status, are participants in the same process.
This is truly the end of teaching/learning, and of grading/examining,
as we have known them. It is no wonder that traditional educationalists
are shocked at the very prospect of digitized education. It deskills
all teachers on a grand scale. It puts an end to the role of teacher.
Competition for Students
We all know that universities are competing with each other for
students in cyberspace. Courses delivered by television and radio
started the trend, and distance learning is expanding. As more
and more courses are offered online, universities will be able
to draw on the entire nation -- or the world -- as potential students.
We can start to see the waste of duplication, of providing 37
English I courses or Engineering II courses, ad infinitum. And
the waste is even greater when so many of these courses are of
such poor quality. This is why it makes sense for a couple of
universities to specialise and to provide the best possible English
I courses or Engineering II courses -- which can then be taken
up by other universities.
Now the implications of this must be obvious: a huge reduction
in the number of teachers or lecturers presenting the courses
and a huge increase in computer support staff, media specialists
etc. Many of those now doing the teaching could well be deployed
as tutors or librarians, to assist students whose courses are
coming from other universities. Teachers will have to compete
with each other -- and with independent writers, researchers,
and service providers, who also have information to sell to potential
students. From local schools to universities, much more emphasis
is going to be placed upon the client or the customer. While I
don't think it will happen in the next year or so, it could be
the case by the turn of the century that there will be one rule
for everyone in the education business: if you haven't any clients
or customers, if there are no "users" who want to buy
the information you are offering, then, like artists and performers
who can't find an audience, you probably won't have a job.
Now this is not the time or the place to argue whether this shift
to information as a commodity, and to the education industry,
is a good or bad thing. The stand I am taking is that this is
the way the world works and that as a creator of content -- as
writer or teacher -- I am going to get on with it.
New Teacher Skills Essential
A basic requirement will be that every teacher be computer competent
-- and this means much more than simply being able to use a word
processor. Just as it would not have been sufficient for educational
professionals to be merely functionally literate in a print-based
system, so now will it be unacceptable for information professionals
to be merely electronically functional.
If teachers at all levels have to be as adept with the computer
as their teaching/research resource as they once were with print,
and the use of the textbook, then the retraining of existing staff
will be a mammoth and costly exercise. But retraining the staff
is only the beginning. Think of the enormous task that is involved
in transforming existing knowledge sources -- journals, textbooks
etc. -- from print to online interactive format. An educational
community that has been primarily word-oriented will have to become
visually sophisticated. In the cyberage, layout is increasingly
important. Graphics is a whole new area of educational expertise,
a source of extensive information and meaning.
Teachers who could once be found in the library, the laboratory
or their studies or staff rooms, preparing their lessons or writing
textbooks, will soon be found creating scripts, or delivering
performances in studios -- or else developing sophisticated software,
intelligent agents, or interactive "games" based on
the old print texts and lessons.
Just as it takes teamwork to produce everything from TV-delivered
courses to a CD-ROM, so too are educational professionals going
to find themselves increasingly working with teams of creative
information people in the very near future, and computer professionals
and support staff will be as much -- if not more -- a part of
the teaching-learning process as textbook writers and educational
publishers have been to the print-based system.
As educational institutions become more like movie studios, there's
nothing to stop television and cable providers from becoming more
like educational institutions. It would even be very easy for
our telephone companies, for example, to start delivering educational
content and to charge for it.
The Classroom of the Future
I have sat in an Internet Cafe in the centre of Brisbane, which
is right next to a university, watching countless students (mostly
male) pay their $5 per half hour to access the Internet in this
highly social scene. Some of the students were even accessing
university information, and I was puzzled as to why they would
pay to do so in the Cafe, when they could go online at the nearby
university -- for free. But when I asked them about this, they
thought I was the one who was behaving strangely. "Why,"
they asked me, "would you sit in the library, where you have
to be quiet and still, when you can come down here and muck around
and have a good time with your friends -- and still do your assignments?"
As I watched them larking around, drinking their coffee and eating
while working on their machines, while music blared and lights
flashed and people came and went, I knew I was watching the classroom
of the future, where students drop in to a social environment
and log on to and interact with their courses, which are being
delivered by "professionals" from any part of the globe.
Flexibility of the medium also needs to be exploited, providing
students the opportunity to learn in their own time frames --
after work, at weekends etc. -- and at their own pace, in their
own homes, and on their own laptops. Students who might be reluctant
to "talk in class" or who have "minority"
views should find the online environment (and "non-face-to-face"
interaction) attractive. More equal access to teacher attention
and time should occur.
We Need to Do More
We have the resources but not, it seems, the vision or the ability
to seize the moment. Except for the occasional event or presentation
(such as this Congress), we don't even have a good record of bringing
together the computer professionals, the educationalists, and
the content contributors. The response to the digital renaissance
in some of our educational institutions borders on the shameful
and is no less the behaviour of the Dark Ages than was that of
the scribes who tried to destroy the corrupting influences of
the printing press.
Everyone who is at this IFIP Congress faces a personal and professional
challenge -- as I do every day of my information life. These are
extraordinary times and call for extraordinary creative responses.
There is nothing to stop us from being innovators in the new digital
environment, and it is the only way we will have a legacy to pass
on to the next generation.
Organizers Evaluate IFIP's First Virtual Conference
Teleteaching 96 (TT96), one of the three conferences held under
the umbrella of IFIP Congress '96 (see the article on page 1 of
the December 1996 IFIP Newsletter), was the fifth in a series
of conferences run by the IFIP Technical Committee on Education
(TC3). Teleteaching refers to the use of computers and communication
technologies in teaching and learning. TT96 addressed the use
of these technologies across all sectors of education (elementary,
secondary, university, and industry) and had particular relevance
for those involved in open learning and distance education. The
conference practiced what it preached, making use of teleteaching
technologies such as video conferencing, e-mail, television, video,
radio, and the WorldWide Web. The major thrust of TT96 was a "virtual"
conference. Students and educators participated from their desktops
or from local access points around the world. Teams in different
countries held e-mail discussions prior to the Congress, and their
results were presented and interpreted at the actual Congress
in Canberra, Australia, in September, where there were 77 registered
attendees from 16 countries for TT96.
Teleteaching 98 will be one of the seven conferences constituting
IFIP Congress '98. Consequently, the strengths and weaknesses
of TT96 have been thoroughly assessed, in order that TT98 be a
success. Prof. Sandra Wills (AUS), chair of TT96 (and a vice-chair
of TC3 as well as chair of four previous IFIP conferences), and
two colleagues, Ms. Geraldine Lefoe (AUS) and Mr. Robert Corderoy
(AUS), released a critique of TT96 in October 1996, just a few
weeks after TT96. (For TC3 members, it is available on the CD-ROM
described below.) Prof. Wills shares the following additional
thoughts with the readers of the IFIP Newsletter.
Some delegates observed that they flew a long way to do things
that they could have done from their desktops at home, which is
true, in a way. There are challenges in integrating a virtual
conference with an on-site conference. What is the value added
for the paying, on-site delegate? To me, the value added has to
do with the fact that often at home we do not make the time to
sit at our desktops for our own professional development, and
when we do, we are alone.
The "Internet Cafe" was a face-to-face meeting place
as well as a virtual meeting place. Whether that opportunity was
worth $1000 "Australian dollars" is another question.
I always knew that running an education conference as part of
the IFIP Congress was going to be difficult. We would never charge
those prices in the education sector. The format of TT96 was the
best compromise I could find to match the constraints I was operating
under.
I think that the TT96 program was uncomfortably different; you
had to really participate in order to get something from it, and
some people did not feel comfortable actively participating. There
were a number who were not high tech, would not have had access
to this equipment on their desktops at home, and were nervous
about asking for help. In hindsight, we definitely did not have
enough helpers in the Internet Cafe, or enough instructions on
what to do.
An analysis of the discussion groups on line showed about 100
"virtual" delegates from 20 countries, with Canada probably
being the most active. I would have liked ten times the number
of virtual delegates, but that's something we still have to work
on: how to attract delegates so that they commit themselves to
putting the time aside to participate at their desktop, when work
and home intrude around them. It still seems to be "easier"
to apply for funding, buy tickets, exchange money, organise passports,
sit on planes for 24 hours, heave luggage around airports and
hotels, counteract jet lag, communicate in foreign languages,
and fight homesickness than to set aside 3 hours to participate
from your desktop!!
There is a direct relationship between the number of papers accepted
and the number of registrations. Academics, and maybe individuals
from industry too, get funding to come to conferences if they
have papers accepted. This was one of the reasons for low attendance
in the two traditional conferences within Congress '96 (not enough
papers were submitted). It was even more of a problem for TT96,
where we didn't have any papers at all. Although we can re-engineer
the format of conferences in the same way that we are trying to
re-engineer our universities and schools, so that they provide
more flexibility, we are still operating within an infrastructure
or culture premised on the old formats. Everything doesn't change
at once, unfortunately.
No print proceedings were produced for TT96. The proceedings,
developed on the fly on the Web, are available to anyone and will
remain on the Web until TT98. Five months after the conference,
on-site delegates, as part of their registration, were sent a
CD-ROM that contains edited highlights from the Web pages plus
excerpts from videotapes of conference events. It was to be published
by Chapman & Hall, the IFIP publishers; however, in the end
it was felt that there were too many unresolved copyright issues
in duplicating other people's Web sites and publishing conversations
from list serv discussion groups. The CD-ROM was, therefore, sent
only to registered TT96 delegates and TC3 members, and is not
for sale. I think the CD-ROM is a rich resource for Teleteaching.
So, check out the Web pages on
http://www.acs.org.au/ifip96/tele.html
I am happy enough with the conference. It was not perfect, but
I have been to three IFIP Congresses and had dealings with a fourth
and, as an "impoverished" educator, was not always happy
with the fees and formats of those either. I am happy that we
practised what we preach and that we demonstrated a model that
we can all now reflect on and improve, if we really are to move
forward into the brave new world that so many of us talk about
as being just around the corner.
by Prof. Dr. Reinhard Gotzhein (D)*
From October 8 to 11, 1996, the IFIP Joint International Conference
FORTE/PSTV'96 was held in Kaiserslautern, Germany, organized by
the University of Kaiserslautern. With 140 participants from 25
countries (including 14 attendees from 6 Eastern European countries),
attendance was above expectations. For the first time, the hitherto
separate FORTE and PSTV conferences were combined into one event.
Both FORTE and PSTV are well-established conference series, organized
under the auspices of the IFIP Working Group on Architecture and
Protocols for Computer Networks (WG6.1), which is chaired by Dr.
Harry Rudin (CH). While the scope of FORTE is formal description
techniques (FDTs) for distributed systems in general, PSTV is
more concerned with communication protocols.
FORTE/PSTV'96 started with one day of tutorials and advanced-technology
seminars covering formal methods for multimedia, formal approaches
to feature interactions in intelligent networks, quantitative
aspects of process algebras, and message sequence charts. The
tutorial day was followed by three days of technical presentations
from academia and industry, including the latest results in theory,
application, tools, and industrialization of FDTs applicable to
communication protocols and distributed systems.
FORTE/PSTV'96 featured four invited presentations, listed here
chronologically. Prof. Dr. Andre Danthine (B) addressed current
developments and standardization efforts for Video Dial Tone Services,
based on ATM technology. Prof. Dr. Manfred Broy (D) provided a
broad view of FDTs and a discussion of their shortcomings with
regard to scientific and semantic foundations. By reviewing some
successful and failed applications of formal methods, Prof. Dr.
Ed Brinksma (NL) examined the conditions under which the application
of formal methods is profitable. Finally, Dr. Lothar Mackert (D)
discussed trends in network computing from a market and industry
perspective and identified areas of needed research.
FDTs are being applied more and more in industry, with commercial
tools available to support the use of some FDTs. To document this,
FORTE/PSTV'96 featured both tool demonstrations, running in parallel
with the Conference presentations, and industrial-usage reports.
The Conference proceedings, entitled Formal Description Techniques
IX -- Theory, Application and Tools and edited by Prof. Dr. Reinhard
Gotzhein (D), the Conference chair, and Mr. Jan Bredereke (D),
have been published by Chapman & Hall. Unlike previous proceedings
of FORTE or PSTV, the final proceedings were produced before the
Conference. The volume includes 28 refereed papers that were carefully
selected by the International Program Committee, based on more
than 400 reviews, out of 110 submissions. Twenty-four of these
are research papers, and four are industrial usage reports (an
acceptance rate of 24% and 50%, respectively).
The next FORTE/PSTV Conference will be held in Osaka, Japan, 18-21
November 1997 and will return to Europe in 1998. For further information,
please see the WorldWide Web page at
http://sunfish.ics.es.osaka-u.ac.jp/forte.pstv97
or send e-mail to
forte-pstv97@ics.es.osaka-u.ac.jp
Information about submitting papers is in the Calls for Papers
column below.
* Conference chair of FORTE/PSTV'96
(one of a series describing IFIP's Technical Committees)
The IFIP Technical Committee on the Relationship between Computers
and Society (TC9) has a charter that is distinct from that of
the other IFIP Technical Committees, in that it deals not so much
with technology as with the impact of that technology on society.
Established in 1976 under the chairmanship of the 1994 Auerbach
Award winner Prof. Calvin Gotlieb (CDN), the TC has extended its
coverage for the past 20 years to keep pace with the ever-expanding
influence and impact of computers. The work of the TC is carried
out primarily by its seven Working Groups (WGs) as well as by
the IFIP Task Force on Ethics and Special Interest Groups on Copyrights,
Patents, and a Universal Access to Information; Disabilities;
and Computers, Women and Work.
We quote from the book A Quarter Century of IFIP (ed. Zemanek)
for a bit of the early history of TC9. This section was written
by Prof. Harold Sackman (USA).
In 1973, Prof. Heinz Zemanek (A), then president of IFIP, submitted
a formal proposal to the IFIP General Assembly for a new Technical
Committee for "Non-Technical Affairs," for the field
of human, philosophical, social, and historical matters, with
Working Groups on "Information Processing and Society,"
on "Computer Applications in the Humanities," and on
the "History of Computers and Automation." The proposal
was turned down. ... Shortly after HCC 1 [the first conference
on Human Choice and Computers, in 1974], at the 1974 IFIP General
Assembly, as Zemanek's presidency of IFIP drew to a close, he
again attempted to recommend approval of TC9. Fred Margulies's
(A) extensive report to the General Assembly on the resounding
success of HCC 1 was used as the basis for the viability and promise
of TC 9. The General Assembly temporized by accepting TC9 "in
principle," and setting up a task group to flesh out the
detailed proposal. In the spring of 1975, C.C. Gotlieb agreed
to chair TC9 for one year, at Zemanek's request. The first working
meeting of embryonic TC9 was held in Boston, August 28, 1975,
with 15 people showing up. Gotlieb was chairman and Margulies
was Vice-Chairman. ... At the subsequent IFIP/GA meeting in 1975
at Rio de Janeiro, Zemanek again proposed acceptance of TC9, only
to have it postponed once more. ... At the 1976 General Assembly
meeting, TC9 was finally formally adopted by IFIP. Only two Working
Groups were authorized, WG9.1, Computers and Work, and WG9.2,
Social Accountability. ... Gotlieb originally agreed to serve
as TC9 chairman for one year, extended it to four years, and was
urged on all sides to remain chairman a full six years, the maximum
allowable in IFIP. ... [In 1981, R. Brotherton (GB) was appointed
chairman of TC9.] Later in 1982, R. Brotherton regretfully announced
his resignation. ... Fred Margulies graciously accepted the interim
Chairmanship of TC9 until a new chairperson could be elected and
appointed.
The other chairs of the TC have been Prof. Sackman (1983-1989),
Prof. Klaus Brunnstein (D, 1989-1995), and Prof. Pertti Jaervinen
(SF, 1996 to the present).
Following are summaries of the TC9 WGs.
The WG on Computers and Work (WG9.1) studies how computers have
affected employment levels, job content and structure, and career
patterns. It encourages the design and development of systems
that promote not only efficiency but job satisfaction. The WG
has cooperated with the U.S. Computer Professionals for Social
Responsibility (CPSR) and with the U.S. ACM special interest groups
on Computer-Human Interaction (SIGCHI) and Office Information
Systems (SIGOIS) in sponsoring conferences. It has now run five
conferences on Women Work and Computerization.
The WG on Social Accountability (WG9.2) has been deeply involved
for the past several years in the development of guidelines for
the evolution of codes of ethics, conduct, and/or practice. This
has been done in behalf of the IFIP General Assembly through a
Task Force on Ethics. The results of this work were published
under the title Ethics of Computing: codes, spaces for discussion,
and law, edited by Prof. Jacques Berleur (B), chairman of WG9.2,
and Prof. Brunnstein. In 1991, WG9.2 established the Namur Award,
which is presented every two years to persons or organizations
that exemplify social accountability in computer environments.
The recipients have been Prof. Joseph Weizenbaum (USA), Dr. Riccardo
Petrella (head of the European FAST programme), and Mr. Carlos-Alberto
Afonso (representative of the Alternex Community, Brazil). WG9.2
also manages two Special Interest Groups: 9.2.1 on Disabilities
and 9.2.2 on Ethics.
The WG on Home-Oriented Informatics & Telematics -- HOIT (WG9.3)
aims to foster benevolent design and use of HOIT. In particular,
it cares about the position of and the potentials for vulnerable
groups like children; less-educated, disabled, elderly, and nonemployed
people; paid and nonpaid workers at home; cultural minorities;
and unaware users.
The WG on Social Implications of Computers in Developing Countries
(WG9.4) has a special and difficult task: to examine the experiences
of introducing computers into developing countries and to raise
the consciousness of computer professionals, policy makers, and
the public to the potential effects. Primarily working through
Internet, WG9.4 maintains a large list of concerned and contributing
scientists throughout the world, who give direction to the work
of the WG. A widely distributed newsletter also serves as an excellent
vehicle for the exchange of ideas and solutions.
The scope of the activities of the WG on Applications and Social
Implications of Virtual Worlds (WG9.5) is being changed from stressing
artificial intelligence to involving trends in digital media and
virtual worlds, as well as the impact of these on society. With
this new emphasis, WG9.5 will look at multimedia, animation, virtual
worlds for education and training, national developments in multimedia
and virtual reality (VR), and the philosophical foundations of
VR. Some of the more interesting VR applications are vocational
training, architecture, and the virtual hospital.
The WG on Information Technology Mis-use and the Law (WG9.6) is
primarily concerned with threats to computer security and the
consequent risks to people and organizations. WG9.6 has the responsibility
of evaluating and proposing general legal prescriptions to control
these threats. The WG is currently working on a program of work
to better identify and categorize protection techniques and their
possible applications.
The WG on History of Computing (WG9.6) is currently working on
two major projects. A joint subcommittee of WG9.7 and TC3 (Education)
is developing guidelines for a curriculum in the history of computing,
expecting to present its first recommendations shortly. The WG
is also responsible for promoting the concept of Pioneer Days
at IFIP Congresses, where the host organizations are encouraged
to recognize the contributions of their national computer pioneers.
Such a meeting was held at the Canberra Congress in 1996 and will
be part of the Vienna/Budapest Congress in 1998.
by Mr. Plamen Nedkov (BG)*
We are happy to announce that on November 29, 1996, Prof. Wilfried
Brauer, an IFIP vice-president, was awarded the degree of Honorary
Doctor of Sciences (Doktor der Naturwissenschaften ehrenhalber)
by the Department of Informatics of the University of Hamburg.
Prof. Brauer is the second recipient of this outstanding honor
from the Department of Informatics, the first being the late German
computer pioneer Prof. Konrad Zuse, to whom Prof. Brauer handed
the award in 1979.
Prof. Brauer was the first Professor of Informatics in Hamburg
and the first Director of the Institute for Informatics, founded
in 1971. The Honorary Doctorate was conferred on him at the Institute's
Silver Jubilee festivity, at which an address was delivered on
behalf of the IFIP president, Prof. Kurt Bauknecht (CH).
* Executive Director of IFIP
Occasionally, we are unable to print the biography of an IFIP
officer before she or he leaves office. Prof. Gruska's is one
such case. Although his second term as chair of Specialist Group
14 ended last year, we print his biography in recognition of his
past work for IFIP and because we expect him to remain active
in the Federation.
Prof. Jozef Gruska was born in Rabcice, Slovakia. He graduated
in mathematics from Commenius University in Bratislava and received
a Ph.D. in Computer Science from the Slovak Academy of Sciences
in 1965. For most of his career, he has been affiliated with institutes
of the Slovak Academy of Sciences. His research interests are
concentrated in the fields of descriptional complexity (he is
one of the founders of the area), parallel automata, and the foundations
of computing. His teaching involvement has ranged from high schools
(in 1977, he developed a special curriculum and wrote basic textbooks)
to teaching at several universities, at home and abroad, to the
education of ten Ph.D. students. Recently, he finished a basic
textbook, Foundations of Computing, with a novel, much broader
approach than usual, to be published this year by International
Thomson Computer Press.
Working in 1959 with analog computers and becoming the first digital
computer programmer in Slovakia, Prof. Gruska was a pioneer of
computing in Slovakia. His weekly scientific seminar, established
in 1966 and still running, is one of the oldest in Europe and
has greatly contributed to the growth of a strong research group
in theory in Bratislava. He is also one of the founders of two
very successful annual meetings, the Mathematical Foundations
of Computer Science Symposium (established in 1972) and the winter
school SOFSEM (established in 1974), which have greatly contributed
to the development of theoretical computer science in Europe and
to computing in general in Czechoslovakia. Prof. Gruska has organized
many conferences and served on the program committees of about
40 international meetings, delivered approximately 120 talks at
conferences and seminars abroad, and spent more than eight years
as a visiting professor at universities in Europe and North America.
He has also served on many scientific bodies at home and has been
on the Council of the European Association of Theoretical Computer
Science for six years.
His first IFIP involvement was at the 1968 Congress in Edinburgh,
where he delivered a paper. Since 1971, he has been a member of
the Czechoslovak National Committee for IFIP, and for six years,
he served as its scientific secretary. At IFIP Congress '86 in
Dublin, he chaired a panel discussion on Pragmatical Aspects of
Complexity Theory. As a member of the International Program Committee
for IFIP Congress '89 in San Francisco, he was responsible for
the very successful theory track. In 1989, he was also given the
responsibility to establish the IFIP Specialist Group (SG) on
Foundations of Computer Science. This SG, at first provisional,
then permanent, was transformed by the 1996 General Assembly in
Canberra into IFIP Technical Committee 1. In 1995, Prof. Gruska
was awarded the IFIP Silver Core.
Prof. Gruska's family is scientifically oriented. His wife, Viera,
teaches mathematics at the Technical University in Bratislava.
Both children are computer scientists: Son Damas works on models
of concurrency at Commenius University in Bratislava, and daughter
Jana is performing research in robotics as a postdoctoral student
at the University of California in Berkeley.
In his leisure time, Prof. Gruska hikes and collects folk and
modern art, Easter eggs, and other objects. His collection of
88 nativity sets from 33 countries (the largest containing 222
pieces) has had several successful exhibitions.
Dr. Roger Johnson (GB), a trustee of IFIP, has been named president-elect
of the Council of European Professional Informatics Societies
(CEPIS). He is a pastpresident of the British Computer Society
and has been active in CEPIS almost continuously since its establishment
in 1988. Nineteen informatics societies and federations are currently
members of CEPIS (an Affiliate Member of IFIP), representing over
150 000 IT professionals in 17 European countries.
Dr. Walter Grafendorfer (A), another IFIP trustee, has been honorary
treasurer of CEPIS since 1995.
by Prof. Otto Spaniol (D)*
The conference series CCDC**/AFRICOM already has a tradition,
at least two events with this name having been held in each of
the following three countries since 1984: South Africa, Tunisia,
and Zimbabwe. The conferences 2>are jointly organized by the
IFIP Technical Committee on Communication Systems (TC6), the ICCC
(International Council for Computer Communication), and the computer
societies of the organizing countries. The most recent event of
the series took place in Harare, Zimbabwe, 15-17 October 1996.
The major components of CCDC/AFRICOM'96 were a large and very
innovative exhibition and the conference itself.
The Exhibition
Everybody was very impressed with the size and the quality of
the exhibition. A high percentage of the displays concentrated
on applications of multimedia systems and on WorldWide Web usage.
It was exciting to see people getting their first experiences
of Internet surfing at the exhibition. I would like to give just
one example of the spontaneous type of communication that resulted
from the exhibition: A visitor to the exhibition was trying to
find useful information about insurance in Africa, since he worked
in that area. Because of my experience with browsing tools, I
was able to help him download some WWW pages related to the topic.
But very soon we were joined by another attendee who had very
good ideas and tricks for better search strategies. This was the
start of a very successful electronically supported group communication,
and I observed several similar conversations at the exhibition.
During the first day of the exhibition, I was a little skeptical
about its eventual success, since there were not too many visitors.
However, for reasons that I did not fully understand (maybe because
of TV advertising), the situation was dramatically different for
the subsequent days of the exhibition, when it became almost too
crowded.
The Conference
There were times when I would have liked the conference to have
been as crowded as the exhibition. The conference facilities within
the Zimbabwe Conference Center were almost too big and too futuristic.
The opening session was held in the main hall, which has some
2000 seats. Thus, the 100 or so participants at the opening sessions
appeared to be a little lost in this environment. I felt much
more comfortable in the subsequent sessions, which were organized
in rooms of approximately 200 seats. The organizing committee
decided to subdivide a few hours of the three conference days
into two parallel streams. The unavoidable consequence was that
the number of participants in the technical substream was not
overly high (the business-oriented substream attracted more people).
For the third and final conference day, the organizers decided
on a single-stream event.
The conference presentations included the usual two extremes:
business-oriented papers (which sometimes were rather similar
to product sales talks) and pure research manuscripts (which sometimes
dealt with ideas that will not be technically viable for the next
decade). As a whole, the vast majority of the 25 presentations
had excellent state-of-the-art content. Nevertheless, for subsequent
events, we should try to concentrate on a smaller number of somewhat
longer presentations, e.g., on "mini-tutorials" of not
less than 60-minute duration about highly relevant topics. This
would probably be much more useful for the audience than the enormous
number of 25-minute talks (which are too short, too densely packed,
and sometimes too specialized).
General Comments
It is essential that organizations like IFIP and ICCC improve
their visibility and their presence in developing countries. Fortunately,
this is facilitated by the fact that access to international networks
has become significantly improved during the past few years --
from access for very few sub-Saharan countries to access facilities
for almost all sub-Saharan countries within less than five years.
Of course, the fact that a country has Internet access doesn't
necessarily imply that very many people can use it with reasonable
effort and cost, but this situation will improve very rapidly.
I.e., network access for smaller towns and even for small villages
will be provided very soon.
Unfortunately, the situation is much less favourable with regard
to the organization and the attendance of conferences: It has
become extremely difficult to travel between African countries.
In many cases, such travel is unaffordable (because of both time
and cost). We could even say that it is easier and cheaper to
reach Zimbabwe from any European country than from the vast majority
of neighbouring African countries. For that reason, AFRICOM'96
should have been called ZIMBABWECOM'96, since almost all conference
participants came from the organizing country. There were two
invited speakers from two other African countries (Mauritius and
South Africa) and some ten more invited speakers representing
other continents of the world.
Recommendations
One concludes that the dissemination of information to developing
countries by means of "international" conferences becomes
more or less restricted to the country in which the event is held.
There may be some dream about improving that situation by videoconferencing
or by similar means, but we have to admit that this is much easier
said than done. As a consequence, I see an increased need for
dissemination by other means than "classical" conferences,
e.g., by visits of small expert groups and by direct consultations,
which, moreover, could be arranged much more easily and rapidly.
* chair of TC6
** CCDC = Computer Communication in Developing Countries
by Dr. Pramode Verma (USA)*
As the IFIP community already knows, the International Council
for Computer Communication (ICCC) is an Affiliate Member of IFIP.
It is my pleasure, as President of the ICCC for the 1997-98 term,
to reaffirm our continuing relationship and express the hope that
we can perhaps build further on the strong foundations we have
laid over the past several years.
The ICCC has been especially close to the IFIP Technical Committee
on Communication Systems (TC6), led by Prof. Otto Spaniol (D).
Most recently, TC6 and the ICCC cooperated to host a major event
in Harare, Zimbabwe, in conjunction with the Computer Society
of Zimbabwe [see the preceding article]. In addition, the two
organizations also held a joint meeting in Nyanga, Zimbabwe, to
discuss common objectives and, especially, plan joint activities
between the two organizations during 1997-98.
The year 1997 is going to be very exciting for the ICCC. We have
three events scheduled to take place: Our Conference on Electronic
Publishing -- possibly the first of its kind -- will be held April
14-16 in Canterbury, U.K. (see the article on page 1 of the December
1996 IFIP Newsletter), followed by the Global Networking '97 Conference,
scheduled to take place in Calgary, Alberta, Canada, June 15-17.
Finally, the ICCC flagship conference, ICCC '97 -- a biennial
event -- will take place in Cannes, France, November 17-21.
Among the many challenges and opportunities that the ICCC has
on its immediate horizon, possibly the most important is the one
to explore and reaffirm a charter that will successfully guide
it into the next millennium. The Governors of the ICCC have been
discussing the ICCC options for some time. A significant recent
development has been that at the last meeting, held in Harare,
the ICCC Governors voted to explore and initiate a new class of
membership: for individuals. If the ICCC proceeds to institute
this new class of membership, it will be an important paradigm
shift for the organization.
Finally, in keeping with the tradition set by my predecessors,
I wish to keep in close touch with IFIP events and continue to
develop our relationship.
* president of the ICCC
A discussion of the geographical and political aspects of IFIP
activities took place during the March 1996 Technical Assembly
(TA) in Johannesburg, South Africa. Pursuing this issue, Prof.
Otto Spaniol (D), chairman of the Technical Committee on Communication
Systems (TC6), included the following analysis in his report for
TC6 to the September TA.
One of the major driving forces behind IFIP since its founding,
namely to be a marketplace for information exchange and cooperation
between Socialist and Capitalist countries, has become much less
important since 1990. This is not because there is no longer a
need for such exchanges, but because no significant funds are
now available for the organisation of events in Eastern Europe.
To give some examples:
That is, whereas participation in IFIP events was extremely highly
valued by former Socialist governments, the importance of IFIP
appears to be considered now as relatively low or even marginal.
In the future, IFIP should pay much more attention to the Southeast
Asia region (Thailand, Malaysia, Singapore, India, Korea, Taiwan,...).
That is the place to be in the coming years! However, IFIP should
not forget about Africa. Finally, IFIP should become much more
visible in Latin America.
In September, the IFIP Technical Assembly (TA), meeting in Canberra,
Australia, approved four new Working Groups. Following are the
Aims and Scope statements for these WGs. (Some of them are slightly
modified versions of the ones approved by the TA.)
WG3.7: Information Technology in Educational Management (ITEM)
AIMS:
SCOPE:
WG6.7: Intelligent Networks
Intelligent Networks (IN) denotes an environment for fast service
creation and service management in telecommunication networks.
IN was developed for voice and telephony services but is now also
applied widely to mobile networks. The development of new broadband
networks and the introduction of interactive multimedia services
will create new service architectures where intelligence in networks
may be redefined.
AIM:
To identify and study current issues related to the development
of intelligent capabilities in networks. These issues include
the development and distribution of services in narrowband, broadband,
and mobile networks.
SCOPE:
Includes but is not restricted to the following topics:
WG6.8: Wireless Communications
AIMS:
SCOPE:
Includes but is not restricted to the following topics:
All topics should be examined from the viewpoint of architecture
and protocols, modulation, coding and decoding, communication
techniques (multiple access, error control, flow control, routing,
etc.), security, implementation, user aspects, and legal, economic,
social, and human issues.
WG8.7: Informatics in Multinational Business Enterprises
AIM:
Encourage collaborative research among practitioners and researchers
to investigate processes, theories, and methods associated with
the use of information technologies in the structure, governance,
and decision making of multinational enterprises.
SCOPE:
Twenty IFIP Member societies prepared reports for the 1996 General
Assembly in Canberra, Australia, about their activities, thoughts
on IFIP, and other interesting material. Some of the reports were
very informative, while others were quite brief. Some indicated
healthy, growing societies, while others told of difficult times.
We report here on those items that caught our attention.
Financial concerns were the most pervasive theme, especially in
developing and post-Socialist countries. How to afford effective
participation in IFIP was discussed in several of the reports.
The report from the Czech Member society pointed out that its
IFIP dues far exceed its annual budget. Only with governmental
support administered through the Academy of Sciences is the society
able to pay its IFIP dues. On the other hand, such support from
the government is not possible in Slovakia. International travel
to conferences is difficult too. One Member society pointed out
that although a grant was awarded by IFIP for an individual from
that country to attend IFIP Congress '96 in Canberra, the amount
was insufficient for him to be able to go. One Member pointed
out that since all society work is performed by volunteers, with
no administrative staff, requests from IFIP for information and
reports are often difficult or impossible to respond to. One report
suggested that more IFIP meetings held by electronic means would
enable developing and post-Socialist countries to participate.
Member Activities
The variety of Member activities is impressive. Many hold annual
conferences. Among the largest are those of Brazil (1500), India
(1600), and Japan (two National Conventions each year, 1500 and
2100 participants in the 1995 Conventions). The Australian Member
is reinstating its national conference.
Several Members reported providing Internet access for their members,
and the Canadian Member mentioned that it makes "extensive
use of the Internet for the operation of the society and for the
delivery of services to members." The Portuguese Member is
organizing "the first Virtual Informatics Meeting ... via
Internet, on the subject: The Information Society."
Some Members provide significant support for their governments
and industry. The Albanian Member, for example, has developed
databases for the telephone service and other organizations. The
Canadian Member is "addressing the human resources crisis
in the Canadian software sector" with training and certification
programs. The Indian Member is implementing Project INTENT (Information
Technology for National Transformation).
The Brazilian Member awards annual prizes for the best M.Sc. and
Ph.D. theses and the best undergraduate research project, as well
as providing "a student forum for discussing educational
and professional subjects." The Czech Member is attempting
to involve professionals who have left academia for private companies.
The Czech and Slovak Members established the Czech and Slovak
Society for Computer Science, in order to maintain "the current
level of professional contacts and cooperation among professionals
in both countries." The Hungarian Member organized the 1996
International Olympics in Informatics. The Swedish Member offers
courses to its members at the graduate level at Swedish universities.
The Canadian Member is working to have its designation of Information
Systems Professional of Canada recognized throughout the nation.
Restructuring is being performed by the Zimbabwe Member for "raising
the Society's profile in the eyes of both its members and the
public at large." The Australian Member is concerned with
maintaining its membership, which is dwindling because of retirement
and resignation of older members and the difficulty in recruiting
new members. The Portuguese Member is striving to improve its
involvement with IFIP. The Slovak Member is organizing Working
Groups and is working to revive IT professional life in regions
of the country outside of Bratislava.
Codes of Ethics, inspired by the work on this topic by the IFIP
Technical Committee on Relationship between Computers and Society,
was mentioned. In its report, the Japanese Member presented its
new code, and the Slovakian Member mentioned planning work on
a new code.
Concerns
A number of Members used their reports to deliver messages to
the IFIP General Assembly. The Canadian Member noted that it remains
difficult to convince its members of the benefits of affiliation
with IFIP and suggests that "IFIP respond to this challenge
by documenting how IFIP international efforts and initiatives
support the work of national Member associations. For example,
the work on the promotion of international standards [for professional
qualifications] could be documented to show how IFIP supports
the efforts of the Member countries and how it ultimately could
affect the individual practitioner in these countries." The
Austrian Member encouraged IFIP Technical Committees and Working
Groups to provide input to the society's journals. The Bulgarian
Member urged organizers of IFIP conferences held in Europe to
seek financial support from the EU. The Singapore Member encouraged
IFIP to establish international standards for IT professionals.
The Swedish Member noted that the Nordic countries are eager to
exchange information with other Member societies, and expressed
a desire that IFIP be a conduit for such exchanges.
In the December 1994 newsletter of the International Federation
for Automatic Control (IFAC), an article was printed on "no-show"
authors (authors who, after their papers have been accepted for
a conference, do not attend and present them). We summarized it
in the March 1995 IFIP Newsletter. Since then, the IFAC newsletter
has discussed further aspects of the issue, which we include here
because of its relevance for IFIP.
The original article set out the following premise: No-show authors
are unethical, and their unacceptable behaviour should be stopped.
There were a number of thoughtful suggestions to improve on this
basic proposal. It was suggested that explicit correspondence
with the offender be initiated before any "blackball list"
or other drastic action is taken, because what may appear to be
a no-show situation may in fact be something else.
One writer described his attempts to act responsibly when he found
himself in the conference city after a long trip but having fallen
seriously ill. He tried, from his sickbed, to call the organizers
at the conference site, but he was unable to inform them of his
problem. Surely, he should not be classified as a no-show.
Another writer described his attempts to contact the organizers
about one week before the conference in a distant land. Email
attempts failed, even though email addresses were published by
the organizers. In this case, it was the organizers who failed
to follow through with useable communications means.
Still another writer explained that he is physically disabled
and unable to get to conferences even though he can continue to
contribute to the field. He thought that conference papers submitted
but not presented represented one means of getting his work exposed.
This is a particularly interesting case and one that deserves
attention. According to Professor Stephen Kahne (USA) [then the
IFAC president], special arrangements should indeed be made for
such an individual. These arrangements could consist of having
others present his work at the conference; alternatively, a request
by the individual to have his paper included in the postprint
volume (with a note that the paper would not be presented because
of special circumstances) should be honored by the organizers.
Clearly, this is not the source of most of the occurring no-show
problems.
One author complained that he was forced into a no-show situation
because the conference organizers insisted that the actual authors
make the presentation. This is a harsh rule but one that, if stated
at the outset of the paper solicitation process, is certainly
reasonable. No-show responses are not appropriate in such cases.
But the burden is on the organizers to state the rules up front.
Of course, there were also a number of commentators who proposed
solutions such as up-front deposits at the time of submission.
The President of IFAC, after having given this much thought, states
that in his opinion this would be unfair to authors from certain
countries and organizations in which such practice is either illegal
or otherwise prohibited. It would be unfair to do this for all
authors just to ferret out the few potential offenders.
Finally, the President urges caution when contemplating black
lists or other measures. The situation must be understood completely
in all cases. The rules for the meeting must be stated explicitly
in the Call for Papers and other announcements, and organizers
must insist on feedback from apparent offenders before taking
draconian measures. To the authors, the President states that
ethical standards are of supreme importance in any professional
field, not the least in automatic control.
In conclusion, the President states: "Our professional integrity
is the most important attribute we have, and the potential impact
of an accusation of unethical behaviour may destroy a career."
by Dr. Jack Rosenfeld (USA)*
FOCUS (Federation on Computing in the United States), the U.S.
Member of IFIP, exists solely to provide U.S. representation in
and support to IFIP. As the U.S. Member in IFIP, it replaced AFIPS
(American Federation of Information Processing Societies), disbanded
in 1991, which had a much broader charter: organizing conferences,
publishing technical material, and performing other activities.
At present, the member societies of FOCUS are the Association
for Computing (ACM) and the Computer Society of the Institute
of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE-CS), although membership
is not restricted to these two founding societies.
I was invited to the annual FOCUS meetings last October, as an
observer and as a spokesman for IFIP. This article, written in
order to bring to the attention of the IFIP community one possible
mode of supporting and maintaining close ties with IFIP, describes
the meeting I was able to attend.
FOCUS holds its annual meetings on two days, one for the IFIP
Technical Committee (TC) representatives (the meeting I attended)
and one for the FOCUS Board of Directors. Nine of the U.S. TC
representatives attended, as well as the FOCUS chair (Dr. Bruce
Shriver), the IFIP General Assembly (GA) representative (Mr. Howard
Funk, who is an IFIP vice-president), and other members of the
FOCUS Board, a total of 15 attendees. The number was especially
impressive when one realizes that FOCUS provides no travel funds
to participants (except for the GA representative).
The most interesting aspect of this meeting was how much it sounded
like an IFIP Technical Assembly (TA) or GA meeting. Naturally,
the reports on TC activities were similar to those heard at the
TA and the GA, but the concerns raised about the future direction
of IFIP were also similar. Among the issues discussed were how
individuals can participate in IFIP Working Groups without actually
attending meetings, what effort in IFIP is expended in accomplishing
something truly significant, how to make conferences self-supporting,
the leading role IFIP should play in social issues of information
processing (Dr. Shriver stressed the importance of this matter),
continued self-evaluation by TCs, and the future of IFIP Congresses.
Furthermore, the written reports of most of the TC representatives,
available before the meeting, were extensive and carefully considered.
In addition to what one might expect, they included comments on
a list of issues raised previously by chairman Shriver: increasing
U.S. participation in IFIP, the amount of financial support IFIP
gives its TCs, the effectiveness of the TCs, the length of term
of TC representatives, communication between IFIP and the FOCUS
societies provided by the representatives, IFIP Special Interest
Groups, succession of representatives, strategic planning of TCs,
and joint TC activities.
In addition to the annual face-to-face Board meetings (approximately
15 people attended the one in October), bimonthly meetings of
the Board are held by telephone conference call.
* Editor of IFIP Newsletter
IFIP TC6/WG6.1
Joint Intl. Conf. on Formal Description Techniques and Protocol Specification, Testing, and Verification -- FORTE/PSTV'97 18-21 Nov 97, Osaka, Japan papers due: 11 Apr 97 contact: Prof. Teruo Higashino Dept. of Information and Computer Sciences Osaka Univ. Toyonaka, Osaka 560 Japan tel: +81-6-850-6607, fax: +81-6-850-6609 e-mail: forte-pstv97@ics.es.osaka-u.ac.jp WWW: http://sunfish.ics.es.osaka-u.ac.jp/forte.pstv97/ 15th IFIP World Computer Congress 31 Aug - 4 Sep 98, Vienna, Austria, and Budapest, Hungary papers due: 16 Jan 98 contact: http://www.ocg.or.at/ifip98
Will event organizers please send calls for papers to both the
IFIP Secretariat and the Newsletter editor. Note that calls cannot
be listed in this column until the events have been approved by
IFIP.
GENERAL ASSEMBLY AND COUNCIL (AND RELATED MEETINGS)
Council 2-6 Mar 97 (Sun.-Thurs.) Bratislava, Slovakia GA 31 Aug - 4 Sep 97 (Sun.-Thurs.) Gramado (Porto Alegre), Brazil Council 1-5 Mar 98 (Sun.-Thurs.) U.K. GA 5-8 Sep 98 (Sat.-Tues.) Budapest, Hungary GA (contiguous to IFIP Congress '00) Beijing, China
TECHNICAL COMMITTEE AND WORKING GROUP MEETINGS
WG1.3 3 Jun 97 Rome, Italy
TC2 5-6 Jun 97 Konstanz, Germany
WG2.2 97 Graz, Austria
WG2.3 22-26 Sep 97 Alsace, France
WG2.4 22-26 Sep 97 Estes Park, CO, U.S.A.
Jun 98 Berlin, Germany
WG2.5 Oct 97 New Mexico, U.S.A.
WG2.6 2-4 Jun 97 Konstanz, Germany
7-10 Oct 97 Leysin, Switzerland
May 98 L' Aquila, Italy
15-18 Dec 98 New Zealand
WG2.7/WG13.4 19-21 Mar 97 Atlanta, GA, U.S.A.
WG2.8 2-6 Jun 97 York, England
WG2.9 May 97 Haifa, Israel
Jan 98 West Indies
Jan 99 Dublin, Ireland
TC3 23-24 Aug 97 Harare, Zimbabwe
Sep 98 Vienna, Austria
99 Copenhagen, Denmark
TC5 8 Nov 97 Detroit, MI, U.S.A.
TC6 2-3 May 97 White Plains, NY, U.S.A.
3-4 Apr 98 Stuttgart, Germany
TC7 22 Jul 97 Detroit, MI, U.S.A.
Jul 99 Cambridge, U.K.
WG7.3 Jun 97 Seattle, WA, U.S.A.
WG7.4 Jul 97 Detroit, MI, U.S.A.
TC8 27-29 Jun 97 Ambleside, U.K.
29-30 Aug 98 Vienna, Austria
99 Israel
WG8.1 17 Jun 97 (with CAISE) Barcelona, Spain
Nov 97 (with QSSE) Delhi, India
15-17 Jul 98 Beijing, China
WG8.2 Jun 97 Philadelphia, PA, U.S.A.
Dec 97 (with ICIS) Atlanta, GA, U.S.A.
Dec 98 Helsinki, Finland
Jun 99 St. Louis, MO, U.S.A.
Aug 00 Jutland, Denmark
WG8.3 14 Jul 98 Bled, Slovenia
WG8.4 3 Oct 97 Perth, Australia, Tucson, AZ, U.S.A., and Delft, the Netherlands
WG8.5 5 May 97 Stockholm, Sweden
WG8.6 Jun 97 Ambleside, U.K.
Dec 98 Helsinki, Finland
TC9 11-12 May 97 Corfu, Greece
WG9.5 2-3 Oct 97 (tentative) Florianopolis, Brazil
TC10 Sep 97 Gramado, Brazil
Sep 98 Vienna, Austria, or Budapest, Hungary
Sep 99 Toulouse, France
WG10.4 28 Jun - 1 Jul 97 Seattle, WA, USA
Jun 98 Munich, Germany
Jun 99 Madison, WI, USA
Jun 00 New York, NY, USA
TC11 May 97 (with SEC 97) Copenhagen, Denmark
Sep 98 Vienna, Austria, or Budapest, Hungary
WG11.1 13 May 97 (with SEC 97) Copenhagen, Denmark
WG11.2 May 97 (with SEC 97) Copenhagen, Denmark
WG11.5 May 97 (with SEC 97) Copenhagen, Denmark
TC13 Jul 97 Sydney, Australia
WG13.4/WG2.7 19-21 Mar 97 Atlanta, GA, USA
Executive Board K. Bauknecht President CH 95-98 H.L. Funk Vice-Pres. USA 94-97 A.W. Goldsworthy Vice-Pres. AUS 95-98 W. Brauer Vice-Pres. D 95-98 G.R. Fairall Vice-Pres. ZW 96-99 G.J. Morris Secretary GB 96-99 D. Khakhar Treasurer S 96-99 Trustees W. Grafendorfer A 95-98 P. Glenn CDN 94-97 M. Gottlieb IL 95-98 R. Johnson GB 95-98 C. Guy ZA 95-97 R. Reis BR 96-99 X. Yan PRC 96-99 J. Granado P 96-97
TC1: G. Ausiello I 97-99 TC2: R. Kurki-Suonio SF 95-97 TC3: B. Samways GB 97-99 TC5: G. Doumeingts F 96-99 TC6: O. Spaniol D 92-97 TC7: P. Kall CH 95-98 TC8: B. Glasson AUS 96-98 TC9: P. Jaervinen SF 96-98 TC10: J.-C. Laprie F 96-99 TC11: B. von Solms ZA 94-98 TC12: L. Carlucci-Aiello I 96-98 TC13: J. Hammond AUS 95-98
A Austria AUS Australia B Belgium BG Bulgaria BR Brazil CDN Canada CH Switzerland CZ The Czech Republic D Germany GB or UK United Kingdom IL Israel NL The Netherlands P Portugal PRC China S Sweden USA U.S.A. ZA South Africa ZW Zimbabwe