sss ssss      rrrrrrrrrrr
                      ssss    ss       rrrr   rrrr
                     sssss     s       rrrr    rrrr
                     ssssss            rrrr    rrrr
                      ssssssss         rrrr   rrrr
                          ssssss       rrrrrrrrr
                    s      ssssss      rrrr  rrrr
                    ss      sssss      rrrr   rrrr
                    sss    sssss       rrrr    rrrr
                    s  sssssss        rrrrr     rrrrr
         +=======    Quality Techniques Newsletter    =======+
         +=======             October 2001            =======+

QUALITY TECHNIQUES NEWSLETTER (QTN) is E-mailed monthly to Subscribers
worldwide to support the Software Research, Inc. (SR), TestWorks,
QualityLabs, and eValid user communities and other interested parties to
provide information of general use to the worldwide internet and
software quality and testing community.

Permission to copy and/or re-distribute is granted, and secondary
circulation is encouraged by recipients of QTN provided that the entire
document/file is kept intact and this complete copyright notice appears
with it in all copies.  Information on how to subscribe or unsubscribe
is at the end of this issue.  (c) Copyright 2003 by Software Research,


                         Contents of This Issue

   o  QWE2001 Moves to March 2002:  Announcement by QWE2001 Program

   o  SERG Reports

   o  CMM -- The Road Not Taken, by Shivakumar Balasubramaniyan

   o  eValid: It's So Easy

   o  The Power of Symbols, by Jeffrey Kane

   o  26th NASA Software Engineering Workshop (Greenbelt, Maryland,
      November 2001)

   o  Web Engineering (Honululu, Hawaii, May 2002)

   o  Reliable Software Technologies -- Ada Europe (Vienna, Austria,
      June 2002)

   o  QTN Article Submittal, Subscription Information


                Quality Week Europe moves to March 2002

                        Important Announcement

                             1 October 2001

In the wake of the September 11 tragedy, Americans, as well as our
European friends, have had to make some very tough decisions.  We try to
go about business-as-usual, but we discover that reality has changed.

The strength of Quality Week Europe is that we really attract an
International Audience and present an International Speaker team. In
this year's program, 40% of the Conference Speakers are from outside
Europe: 16 from the USA, 2 from Canada, and 1 from Brazil to be precise.
We live in highly uncertain times and a significant number of speakers
have expressed doubts -- or even outright unwillingness -- to travel.
People just do not want to be away from their loved ones.  Not now, when
the US Attorney General talks about possible additional attacks.

Business-to-Business commerce spending has been hit hard by the current
economic slowdown, forcing many firms to downgrade their earning
forecasts and consequently, their spending. Linda Rosenberg, a QWE
Keynote Speaker from NASA, has had to cancel: nobody at NASA may travel
abroad "for the duration".  We receive reports daily on how many
companies have put severe travel restrictions on all their employees.
This will not only affect our speakers but also the number of attendees.

No, these are not ordinary times.

We really want to do the right thing for the community.  And, we want to
make sure that Quality Week Europe meets the high standards you have
grown to expect.  After carefully considering how our decision could
impact others, and after looking at the many sensibilities at play, we
decided to reschedule the Quality Week Europe for the second week of
March, exactly four months from the original date.  We hope that in
these months the world situation will have improved.

The Quality Week Europe Conference will be held from 11-15 March 2002,
at the Sheraton Hotel, 3 Place Rogier, Brussels, BELGIUM.

May we invite you all to put the dates in your agenda!  The conference
material is put together; the program is made up; we are not changing
the topics or the speakers. We are just pushing Quality Week Europe four
months forward.

In light of the tragic events, and the many repercussions for so many
people and in so many businesses world-wide, we hope that you can see
the rationale in this decision.

I'm looking forward to welcoming all of you in Brussels in March.

                           With warm regards,

                             Edward Miller
                              QWE Chairman


                            SERG Report 397
             Design Guidelines and Documentation Paradigms
                      for Object Oriented Programs
                            Mr. Jens Andexer

Almost daily one reads about the advances in technology and leading the
way, it seems, is the computer industry.  Storage costs are dropping,
processor cycles per dollar are increasing, but nagging at the heels of
these successes are stories from the software industry reporting cost
overruns and ballooning expenses.  Why is that?  And what about today's
crop of new software technologies?

Object Oriented programming languages are a new technology.  Some
believe this new technology can cure many of the software industries
ills, that it is a "silver bullet [52]".  In order to find a cure one
must understand the disease, not just treat the symptoms.  Costs are
only a symptom.  What is driving them up?  The answers to these
questions do not lay in new cutting edge of technology, their answers
lay in what happens to cutting edge technology over time.

This thesis explores what happens to software as it ages.  Starting from
a basic understanding of software aging, a deeper understanding of its
details is established by analyzing the most prevalent software
maintenance process in industry.  This analysis uncovers what makes
software maintenance so difficult and, therefore, so expensive.  The
information gained from the analysis of the software maintenance process
is used to develop design guidelines and a documentation paradigms that
take much of the speculation out of designing software for maintenance.
Finally, a case study is developed that shows what the documentation for
a system developed using this thesis might look like.

   o       o       o       o       o       o       o       o       o

                            SERG Report 398
               Using Tabular Expression Input to Specify
                  and Generate Program Family Members
                              Deliang Han

When one is to develop program families traditional, programming methods
that are intended for the development of a single program are not
appropriate. There are several different approaches available. Here we
will focus on the FAST process developed at Lucent [24]; it is a
reasonably systematic process for developing families that has been used
at Lucent Technologies for years and has proven successful.

In the FAST process, after identifying the commonalities and parameters
of variation in family of programs, a special purpose programming
language is developed. This language is used by an "Application
Engineer" only to create members of the family. The common features of
the family are already built-in; only the differences need to be

McMaster University's Software Engineering Group (Hamilton, Ontario,
Canada), is developing a set of tools to support the use of a broad
class of tabular expressions (TTS).  Using tabular expressions one may
present complex conditional expression in a way that is more easily
read, analyzed, and more likely to be correct than either conventional
mathematics or conventional programs.

In this work I propose to combine these two technologies.  I will
enhance the FAST process using tabular notation and table-based tools.
The results of the commonality analysis of the FAST process, as
developed at Lucent, will be used to develop a set of incomplete tabular
expressions.  The completed parts represent the commonalities.  The
incomplete parts correspond to the parameters of variation.  The
application engineer must complete the tables in order for the Code
Generator of TTS to generate a prototype family member.

           The web address for downloading these reports is:


                       CMM -- The Road Not Taken

Abstract:  The Capability Maturity Model for Software developed by the
Software Engineering Institute has had a major influence on software
process and quality improvement around the world.  The SW-CMM defines a
five level framework for how an organization matures its software
process. These levels are the result of evolution from ad hoc process to
more matured and disciplined software process.  This article discusses
the successful aspects of process improvement efforts that are not
explicitly addressed by the CMM, but which are critical in achieving
business and process improvement goals. It also summarizes the lessons
learned by an organization which matured up with these practices. Thus
this paper presents some of the issues associated in interpreting CMM
from the perspective of an organization which is interested in improving
its software process.

                       Capability Maturity Model


According to Mark C Paulk a key author of CMM, Software CMM is a common
sense application of process management and quality improvement concepts
to software development and maintenance.  To start with, it would be
appropriate to see the some of the definition of Software process:

> Process -- a sequence of steps performed for given purpose (IEEE)

> Software Process -- a set of activities, methods, practices and
transformations that people used to maintain software and associated
products (SEI)

Hence the purpose of this paper is to summarize the general techniques,
methods and lesson learned while an organization is heading to Level 3
and 4, thereby providing a light to those organizations which are
beginning their process im-provement journeys.

                   Process Definition and Deployment

The major cultural shift occurs when an organization has decided to move
into a more sophisticated process from an adhoc heroic process. For an
organization maturing to Level 3, the process documentation seems to be
high, maximum though!.  But in due course these processes mature too and
thereby can be used by both very experienced  and novice professionals.
Survey of various organization proves that most of the organization uses
web as the means for their process assets. But only few takes a step
further in automating the process. This not only provides the
organization an eye over existing process but also provides an advantage
of automating the existing process which thereby ease up the process in
a controlled manner This paper will now on cover the various methods
which a company should focus while making a giant but smooth transition
in implementing CMM for process improvement.


Documented processes are of little value if they are not effectively
deployed. The first but foremost thing that any organization would do
while implementing its processes is to conduct training on various
processes that has been developed for the organization. This training
includes internally and externally developed training materials,
awareness programs and workshops. Training is tailored to the needs and
experience of the professionals not only to develop skills but also acts
as a mode for imparting the processes thereby leading to process
improvement.  A good training should not educate every people on
everything instead it should identify the needs of the people for which
they require training to do their jobs effectively. Hence the first step
before conducting the training is to identify the training needs of
individuals who can be either a novice or an experienced professionals.

To share my experiences of the training programs conducted in my
organization as part of process implementation, there were no separate
alien individuals who were not part of process definition involved in
training but the training team comprised of only the process owners who
were actually involved in the process definition. This not only gives
more visibility of the processes to those who attend training but also
gives a feeling of comfort and belief on the various owners of the
processes who has specialized in each of these processes.   A training
session should not be a mere imparting of the processes instead it
should also collect the feedbacks from the team and analyze the results
and do a corrective action. Since process implementation is to ease the
work of individuals, these feedbacks collected during the training
sessions from the individuals should incorporate any changes to the
processes if found appropriate.  Above all these trainings should follow
the "Training Procedure" specified in Quality Management system of the

                        Incremental Improvement

As discussed earlier most of the organization uses web as their means
for process assets but only few takes a step ahead in automation their
process. The reason why an organization steps into automating its
processes is that they use this automated support to:

>Define the software processes

>Deploy those processes across the organization

>Instrumenting processes to collect both product and process data

>Perform data analysis for measurement.

To quote a saying about measurement:

         "If you don't measure then you haven't done anything."

Hence an automated system would provide more vicinity of the processes
and  product data  for measurement by supporting

>An online repository of software engineering processes and management

>Time sheet automation, to collect effort data in useful categories

>Database of intergroup commitments and their status

>Organization process capability database, to provide process capability
baseline data to projects.

                     Solving Implementation Issues

Building a software is intensive but building a process is a crucial
enabler of success. Although standard processes provide a foundation,
each project will also have unique needs. Hence these processes needs to
be tailored to the needs of the project. Unreasonable constraints on
tailoring can lead to significant resistance to follow the process.
When an organization has decided to move from its initial level there
will always be resistance to change across the organization. This is
very true for small organization because they can easily know the
various activities pertaining to the project hence introducing a process
in between will be initially seen as barrier. But it should be
understood that it is relatively difficult to implement process in large
organization compared to that of small organization. If this is made
clear, then process implementation would never be considered as a

In reality it can be foreseen that a company heads towards process
improvement when it grows in size. This starts with an formation of an
expert group in the organization called the "Software Engineering
Process Group (SEPG)" which involves itself in the process definition.
This group is responsible in:

>Making skillful observations over current environment

>Understanding and analyzing organizational problems

>Defining needed change

>Exerting influence to make change happen.

Probably you can call them as Change Agents! Because they influence
others in the organization for a change by:

>Raising conscious on how bad things are really today

>Paint a vision on how things can be done in future

>Involve people impacted by change to define and deploy

>Finally show how things have become better.

Hence these change agents can influence others for change thereby
solving most of the implementation issues.

                         Key Process Attributes

This section attempts to focus on some of the lessons learned while
implementing CMM for process improvement. The following list contains
some process attributes that are important and should be considered
while implementing effective processes in an organization

>All processes should be documented -- but keep it simple.

>Individuals should be trained -- impart the skill to use it.

>All processes should be owned by responsible process owners

>All  processes should be maintained -- Updated as needed

>Changes to the processes are controlled -- process changes are

>All processes are verified and validated -- checked for correct

According to Humphrey keeping a process simple would resolve most of the
conflicts during process implementation. Because in a rapidly changing
world, processes need not be lengthy or complex as SWCMM was intended
for doing things and not having things. He also adds that sub processes
and procedures can be invoked as needed and useful. Thus a simple
processes will prove to be fruitful right from the beginning of
implementation of the process rather than having a complex process which
may give the expected results only in the long run.  Therefore
considering all the above process attributes while implementing the
process would leave little place to issues during the process
implementation journey.  Added to this if these processes are automated
then this process asset would not only prove to be advantageous to every
individuals who use these processes but also to the organization as well


Software process improvement is important hence various standards and
procedures can help the organization to improve their software process
but focusing on achieving maturity level without really improving the
underlying process would not only be painful but also dangerous.
Therefore a meaningful goal is to be set for process improvement in
terms of business needs which impacts cost, cycle time, productivity,
quality, and most importantly customer satisfaction.  Thus it should be
borne in mind that,
      "Maturity levels are a measure of improvement and not the goal for

Every organization should head towards a successful software process
improvement  by measuring and predicting how much further they have to
go to achieve these goals.  Hence to conclude with the quote from the
poem "The Road Not Taken":

                   Two roads diverged in a wood, and
                    I took the one less traveled by
                 And that has made all the difference.
                    -Robert Frost, Mountain Interval

Each organization should take a step ahead in process implementation for
software process improvement providing an unfair advantage over others
thereby making a difference.


Software Inspection, by Tom Gilb & Dorothy Graham

Effective CMM based software improvement, by Mark C. Paulk

Practices of highly mature organizations, 1999 SEPG conference, Atlanta,

A History of Capability Maturity Model for Software, by Mark C. Paulk

The Author:  Shivakumar Balasubramaniyan holds a bachelor's degree in
Electrical and Electronics Engineering. He has his specialization in
designing Test strategies and has contributed an article on the same.
The author is one of the key member in the Software Quality Assurance
team in Think Business Networks and he has also worked as a full time
member in Software Engineering Process Group (SEPG) involving himself in
the process definition for his organization which is heading towards
SEI-CMM.At present he is heading the Software Quality Assurance Team for
the project Digital Nervous System, which basically automates the
software processes.


                         eValid -- It's So Easy

Why test websites the hard way?  If you're testing a website, why not
test it from a browser?  The easy way.  The natural way.  The same way
users view it.

With the eValid test engine powering your test project you'll breath
easy.  Improving website quality will be like a breath of fresh air.

  * Why struggle with complicated GUI maps and what they mean and how to
    fiddle with them?  eValid extracts the data it needs direct from the
    browsed pages, the easy way, the natural way.

  * Why sweat complex interfaces, lengthy setups and add-on modules?
    eValid installs and runs with one click.  It's completely self-
    contained and ultra simple to use -- everything you need is on a
    single pull-down menu.

  * Why put up with special hand processing for secure sessions and
    HTTPS and XML?  eValid is already a browser and it handles
    EVERYTHING on the web painlessly.

  * Why beg management for a small fortune to buy test tools?  eValid is
    sensibly priced.  Feature for feature, eValid is a real productivity

  * Why accept inexact timings, inaccurate validations, less-than-real
    user simulations, and faulty load values?  eValid's validation
    modes, detailed timing, and multiple playback modes are all 100%
    real and 100% accurate.

  * Why waste time fitting client/server test technology to the special
    problems of website testing?  eValid uses web-browser based
    technology to test web-browser viewed objects -- websites -- the
    natural way, the way it should be.

Try eValid and see for yourself how really simple website testing can

eValid runs the way a website test engine should.  Inside the browser,
the way clients see the website.  The easy, all-natural way.

To make it even simpler to try eValid we offer an instant 3-day Auto-
EVAL license with simplified 1-click installation.  Download from:

A full description of eValid Ver. 3.0 features is at:

Complete information on eValid is at:
  <> or <>.

For removal send email to .


                          The Power of Symbols

                            Jeffrey C. Kane
                      President & CEO,

How do you convey the meaning of your specifications symbolic
requirements?  When Geometric Dimension and Tolerancing (GD&T) per ASME
Y 14.5 are called out on drawings or when Statistical Process Control
(SPC) symbols are utilized to convey your customer's requirements, how
does your company flow these requirements down to your Inspectors,
Operators or Sub-Tier Suppliers?  Symbols like "Maximum Material
Condition" or "X double bar- the grand average of average X" can get
pretty wordy without the means to print or reproduce their respective

These symbols break through the language barrier.  Regardless of how you
say the word "Diameter" or "Surface Finish" in your native language, in
German, French or Japanese, the symbols remain the same.

For example, look at the following GD&T feature control callout; 4X Dia.
6.2/6.1.  See for example the symbol:

According to ASME Y 14.5 it has the following meaning; Four Places
diameter range of 6.1 minimum to 6.2 maximum placed in four place 0.8
diameter pattern-locating tolerance zone cylinders at maximum material
condition.  Pattern-locating tolerance zone framework (PLTZF) is located
and oriented relative to datum primary datum plane A and secondary datum
axis B (no rotational requirements) and placed in a four place 0.25
diameter feature-relating tolerance zone cylinders at maximum material
condition.  Feature-relating tolerance zone framework (FRTZF) is
oriented to primary datum plane A.

Although I have not met a single quality or engineering professional
that could translate this type of callout "word for word" exactly as
ASME Y 14.5 translates it, but the concept is becoming universally
understood.  Imagine being tasked with translating this into a number of
foreign languages without the use of any symbols!

For many years I painstakingly drew each symbol by hand or with the help
of a drawing or drafting software, one feature at a time.  I used to be
pretty good at making short cuts too, for example, I would use the
drawing toolbar in "Word" and select "Basic Shapes" then "Parallelogram"
to insert the Flatness symbol into my "CAD", "Word" or "Excel" made
drawings or inspection reports for our larger customers.  I also had
several SPC forms, histograms and "X-bar and R" charts for production or
inspection to use that looked very professional except for the "home
made" looking symbols.

Even though there were a number of software packages available to
produce these symbols I refused to spend hundreds of dollars to obtain
them.  This drove me to develop the TrueType fonts that, once installed
into your systems fonts folder, are available in all your applications
font drop down windows.  They can be picked from the drop down list just
like Arial or Courier, they can be bolded or italicized and manipulated
just like any other font. The difference is, that with a single stroke
of the keyboard, any GD&T, SPC or Engineering/Drafting symbol appears
into any of your computer's applications.

I have used them myself in, or sold them for use in the following
applications; CAD, Autocad, Pro/E, Solidworks, Autocad LT, 2D,
Microstation, Cadkey, Catia, Microsoft Word, Excel, Corel Draw, Word
Perfect (just to name a few).  A number of software developers have
embedded our fonts into their Quality Assurance software for tasks like;
Gage Calibration, Statistical Process Control, Cause and Analysis
Reporting, Corrective Action, Cost of Quality and many more.  If your
position requires that you produce; 1st Article Inspection Reports,
Production Inspection Reports, SPC or Quality forms, educational
materials for training personnel, correspondence with customers or even
an impressive risumi these symbol fonts can become indispensable.

The GD&T and SPC symbols used in design are the base language of the
world.  They have international recognition by manufacturing,
purchasing, engineering and quality professionals.  In the future of
global trade, a picture (symbol) IS worth a thousand words.

Of course there are a number of vendors to choose from that offer GD&T
fonts.  I have yet to see any that offer the SPC font yet.  If you feel
that you can use these fonts to speak the worldwide language of
business, search the Web and compare quality and price, I am confident
which choice you will make.


                The 26th Software Engineering Workshop
                       November 27 - 29 th , 2001
                   NASA, Goddard Space Flight Center
                         Greenbelt, Maryland,
                       (Greenbelt Marriott Hotel)

The Software Engineering Workshop (SEW) is sponsored by the NASA/Goddard
Space Flight Center (GSFC), Software Engineering Laboratory (SEL) and
the IEEE Computer Society.

Each year software practitioners from around the world attend this forum
to share experiences and exchange ideas on the measurement, use, and
evaluation of software methods, models, and tools.

Keynote Speaker:  Al Diaz, Center Director, Goddard Space Flight Center,

Tutorials:  Software Measurement; Software Quality Assurance; Practical
Software Safety: An Overview Approach; Pair Programming: Experience the

Registration and Hotel information:

                      General Chair: Mike Hinchey
                     Program Chair: Linda Rosenberg


                    Call For Papers: Web Engineering

                 Alternate Track of 2002 International
                  World Wide Web Conference (WWW2002),
                   May 7-11 in Honolulu, Hawaii, USA


Co-Chaired by:
Martin Gaedke, University of Karlsruhe, Germany
Daniel Schwabe, PUC-RIO, Brazil
San Murugesan, University of Western Sydney, Australia
Yogesh Deshpande, University of Western Sydney, Australia

Key Dates are:
Paper Submission deadline: November 13, 2001
Author Notification: January 25, 2002
Final Paper Due: February 25, 2002

The World Wide Web is having phenomenal impact on business, industry,
finance, education, government, entertainment, and other sectors. The
Web's initial scope as an environment for information exchange has been
significantly extended, and a whole range of new applications is
emerging in the Web environment. The Web also serves as a platform for
many distributed applications. The original simple and well-defined
document-oriented model of the Web, which limits the Web's potential, is
being extended and enhanced by initiatives such as Semantic Web to cater
to advanced applications.

Web application development is, however, still mostly ad hoc, generally
lacks disciplined and systematic approaches, causing concerns about
their maintainability, quality and reliability. It often neglects
appropriate established practices from other disciplines such as
Hypermedia and HCI to create, manage, and reuse structures of the
information space and enhance the end user experience. And in most
cases, Web development suffers from its biggest potential: new
technologies and devices allowing for ubiquitous use of these

Web Engineering addresses these issues and focuses on systematic,
disciplined and quantifiable approaches to the cost-effective
development and evolution of high-quality, ubiquitously usable Web-based
systems and applications.

This track covers processes, methodologies, system design, lifecycle and
management of large Web-based systems and education and research issues.
Further, it would discuss case studies and best practices, and pave
directions further work.

Topics of interest include, but are not limited to:

- Web Application Development Processes and Methodologies
- Design Models and Methods
- Web Application Frameworks and Architectures
- OO Technology and Component-Based Web Engineering
- Web Services and Service-based Approaches
- Reuse and Integration
- Web Design Patterns and Pattern Mining
- Managing System Evolution and Maintenance
- Web Personalization
- Web Metrics
- Quality Measures and Evaluation
- Web Usability
- Web Application Testing
- Performance Monitoring and Evaluation
- Development Teams and Web Project Management
- Legal and Social Obligations
- Case Studies

Papers discussing relationship and interaction among Web development and
other disciplines are also invited.


            CALL FOR PAPERS: 7th International Conference on
            Reliable Software Technologies - Ada-Europe'2002

                   17 - 21 June 2002, Vienna, Austria


Sponsored by Ada-Europe, organized by T.U.Wien, in cooperation with ACM

General Information:
The 7th International Conference on Reliable Software Technologies
(Ada-Europe'2002) will take place in the year 2002 in Vienna, Austria.
The full conference will comprise a three-day technical program and
exhibition from Tuesday to Thursday, and parallel workshops and
tutorials on Monday and Friday.

For more information, visit the conference Web site at http://www.ada-

      - 31 October 2001:  Submission of papers, extended abstracts and
              proposals for tutorials and workshops
      - 10 January 2002:  Notification to authors
      - 10 February 2002: Full papers required for accepted extended abstracts
      - 10 March 2002:    Final papers (camera-ready) required
      - 17-21 June 2002:  Conference

The conference will provide an international forum for researchers,
developers and users of reliable software technologies.  Presentations
and discussions will cover applied and theoretical work currently
conducted to support the development and maintenance of software
systems.  Participants will include practitioners and researchers from
industry, academia and government.  There will be a special session on
embedded systems, including the use of Ada in this realm.

For papers, tutorials, and workshop proposals, the topics of interest
include, but are not limited to:

+ Embedded Systems (special session).
+ Management of Software Development and Maintenance: Methods,
  Techniques and Tools.
+ Software Quality: Quality Management and Assurance, Risk Analysis,
  Program Analysis, Verification, Validation, Testing of Software
+ Software Development Methods and Techniques: Requirements Engineering,
  Object-Oriented Technologies, Formal Methods, Software Management
  Issues, Re-engineering and Reverse Engineering, Reuse.
+ Software Architectures: Patterns for Software Design and Composition,
  Frameworks, Architecture-Centered Development, Component and Class
  Libraries, Component Design.
+ Tools: CASE Tools, Software Development Environments, Compilers,
  Browsers, Debuggers.
+ Kinds of Systems: Real-Time Systems, Distributed Systems, Fault-
  Tolerant Systems, Information Systems, Safety-Critical and Secure
+ Applications in Multimedia and Communications, Manufacturing,
  Robotics, Avionics, Space, Health Care, Transportation, Industry.
+ Ada Language and Tools: Programming Techniques, Object-Oriented
  Programming, New Approaches in Tool Support, Bindings and Libraries,
  Evaluation and Comparison of Languages, Language Extension Proposals.
+ Ada Experience Reports: Experience Reports from Projects using Ada,
  Management Approaches, Metrics, Comparisons with past or parallel
  Experiences in non-Ada Projects.
+ Education and Training.
+ Case Studies and Experiments.

Authors are invited to submit original contributions.  Submissions
should be in English.  An extended abstract (4-6 pages) or, preferably,
the full paper (up to 12 pages) should be sent using the Web submission
form.  For more information please see the conference Web page:

Conference Chair:
      Gerhard H. Schildt
      Technical University Vienna
      Dept. of Computer-Aided Automation
      Treitlstr. 1-3
      A-1040 Vienna, Austria

Program Co-Chairs:
      Johann Blieberger
      Technical University Vienna
      Dept. of Computer-Aided Automation
      Treitlstr. 1-3
      A-1040 Vienna, Austria

      Alfred Strohmeier
      Swiss Fed. Inst. of Technology in Lausanne
      Software Engineering Lab
      CH-1015 Lausanne EPFL, Switzerland

      ------------>>> QTN ARTICLE SUBMITTAL POLICY <<<------------

QTN is E-mailed around the middle of each month to over 9000 subscribers
worldwide.  To have your event listed in an upcoming issue E-mail a
complete description and full details of your Call for Papers or Call
for Participation to .

QTN's submittal policy is:

o Submission deadlines indicated in "Calls for Papers" should provide at
  least a 1-month lead time from the QTN issue date.  For example,
  submission deadlines for "Calls for Papers" in the March issue of QTN
  On-Line should be for April and beyond.
o Length of submitted non-calendar items should not exceed 350 lines
  (about four pages).  Longer articles are OK but may be serialized.
o Length of submitted calendar items should not exceed 60 lines.
o Publication of submitted items is determined by Software Research,
  Inc., and may be edited for style and content as necessary.

DISCLAIMER:  Articles and items appearing in QTN represent the opinions
of their authors or submitters; QTN disclaims any responsibility for
their content.

STW/Regression, STW/Coverage, STW/Advisor, TCAT, and the SR logo are
trademarks or registered trademarks of Software Research, Inc. All other
systems are either trademarks or registered trademarks of their
respective companies.

          -------->>> QTN SUBSCRIPTION INFORMATION <<<--------

To SUBSCRIBE to QTN, to UNSUBSCRIBE a current subscription, to CHANGE an
address (an UNSUBSCRIBE and a SUBSCRIBE combined) please use the
convenient Subscribe/Unsubscribe facility at:


As a backup you may send Email direct to  as follows:

   TO SUBSCRIBE: Include this phrase in the body of your message:

   TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Include this phrase in the body of your message:

Please, when using either method to subscribe or unsubscribe, type the
 exactly and completely.  Requests to unsubscribe that do
not match an email address on the subscriber list are ignored.

		Software Research, Inc.
		1663 Mission Street, Suite 400
		San Francisco, CA  94103  USA

		Phone:     +1 (415) 861-2800
		Toll Free: +1 (800) 942-SOFT (USA Only)
		Fax:       +1 (415) 861-9801
		Web:       <>