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 =======+ +======= August 2002 =======+ +===================================================+ 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 2002 by Software Research, Inc. ======================================================================== Contents of This Issue o QW2002 -- Conference Reminder o Making Software Testing More Effective (Part 2 of 2), by Boris Beizer o Attaining Excellence o eValid Yahoo Discussion Group Formed o ISSTA Technical Program o International Workshop on Certification and Security in E- Services o Quality Is...... o ICSE 2002 Conference Description o Edsger W. Dijkstra: 1930-2002 o QTN Article Submittal, Subscription Information ======================================================================== Fifteenth International Software and Internet Quality Week Conference, 3-6 September 2002, San Francisco, CA USA *** FULL PROGRAM DETAILS at: <http://www.qualityweek.com/QW2002/program.phtml> Discover why leading companies like as CNET, Cisco Systems, Fidelity Investments, Hewlett Packard, IBM, Intel, Jet Propulsion Labs, Microsoft, Motorola, and Public Works & Gov't Services (Canada) are coming to Quality Week! QW2002 is the meeting place where you get a balanced picture of applied test and quality control technologies, of current academic/industrial research and development, and of real-world experience. QW2002's speakers are top industry and academic leaders, ready to share the latest thinking and strategies that will help your business succeed and grow. Hear exciting keynote addresses from: > Fred Baker, Cisco Systems > Don O'Neill, Center for National Software Studies > Eric Simmons, Intel Corporation > Professor Dick Hamlet, Portland State University > Robert Binder, Mobile Systems Verification > Gregory Pope, University of California/LLNL *** QW2002 OFFERS... The QW2002 program consists of four days of Training Seminars, Mini-Tutorials & Quick-Starts, Panels, Technical Papers and Workshops that focus on software and internet test technologies as practiced around the world. * 14 full and half-day in-depth training seminars. * 92 Presentations, in a three-day, six-track Conference. * Practical Keynotes with real-world experience from leading industry practitioners. * The latest research results from academia. * Exchange of critical information among technologists, managers, and consultants. * Lessons learned & success stories. * State-of-the-art information on software quality and web methods. * Vendor technical presentations and demonstrations. * Latest tools and trends. * Three-day Vendor Show/Exhibition. You're invited to participate in the premier Software and Internet Quality Conference -- Quality Week 2002, San Francisco, 3-6 September 2002. *** PRE-REGISTRATION SAVINGS Pre-Register before the start of the conference and receive the early-bird rates through August 30: <http://www.qualityweek.com/QW2002/register.phtml> *** SUPER SAVINGS FOR GROUPS If you have a group of people who will register together we have some really sweet deals for you! Call Rita Bral at +1 (415) 861-2800 for details on how to save a bundle! *** SAN FRANCISCO MARRIOTT EXCLUSIVE HOTEL SAVINGS: Explore San Francisco during the Labor Day week-end before, or stay after Quality Week and enjoy the special QW2002 Conference rate of $149 single/double (valid from August 30 through September 8): <http://www.qualityweek.com/QW2002/hotel.phtml +---------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ | Quality Week 2002 | Phone: [+1] (415) 861-2800 | | SR Institute | Toll Free (USA): 1-800-942-SOFT | | 1663 Mission Street, Suite 400 | FAX: [+1] (415) 861-9801 | | San Francisco, CA 94103 | Email: qw@sr-corp.com | | USA | Web: http://www.qualityweek.com | +---------------------------------+-----------------------------------+ ======================================================================== Making Software Testing More Effective (Part 2 of 2) by Boris Beizer Note: This article is taken from a collection of Dr. Boris Beizer's essays "Software Quality Reflections" and is reprinted with permission of the author. We plan to include additional items from this collection in future months. You can contact Dr. Beizer at. 2.3. Failure to Automate Test Design and Debug Labor Why haven't we been able to automate more of the test design work? There are all of the barriers for test execution automation, plus: 1. Insufficient training in test techniques obviates use of sophisticated tools (even if they did exist). 2. Automate what? if we don't know what works. 3. Conflicts with software design automation needs. 4. Hardware, operating systems, language processors, not designed with testing needs in mind. Let's learn from the one activity we know best and which is closest to what we do -- software design. Software design automation has advanced (over the past three decades by: 1. Higher order languages -- where is our common scripting language? 2. Proprietary software packages -- where are the proprietary test suites? 3. Common subroutines, utilities, libraries -- where are they for testing? The big payoff in test design automation will not come from fancy tools, but from the evolution of maintained libraries of test "subroutines", test "macros", and test "functions". That can't happen without a substrate of test configuration control and management and test design languages. In other words, look at the panoply of software development tools and recognize that our needs in testing is no less complex. 2.4. Why We Don't Know When to Stop The danger today is as great for overtesting without purpose as it was in the past for undertesting. The marketplace will eventually take care of the habitual undertesters. Pointless overtesting can wreck a budget and schedule as surely as bad software. Why is it that most of us jump from under-testing to gross overtesting? 1. Over-reaction to a history of miserable software. 2. Few objective standards for "adequate" testing. 3. No quantitative definition of software quality. 4. The "perfect" software myth. 5. No universal use of cover monitoring and other metrics. 6. A murky legal situation. We don't know when to stop because we don't know how effective our techniques are; because we're afraid to stop; because we don't have standards that tell the tester when to stop and the buyer when to accept. 3. The Role of Standards 3.1. Overview The key log to the logjam lies in the development, adoption and promotion of software quality, testing, and acceptance standards. 3.2. Do Standards Dictate or Describe? The role of standards is generally misunderstood. The popular notion is that an industry standard dictates what the industry should do. That's not the case. Standards do not dictate, they describe the industry's consensus as to what constitutes acceptable practice: standards define a floor, not a ceiling. In other words, a standard is not something you have to "work up to" but rather, something you don't want to "work down to". Private and government purchasing standards such as MIL-specs can dictate -- e.g. "If you don't meet the standard I won't buy"; but there is an implied willingness to pay the (high) price for meeting such standards. The standards produced by IEEE, ISO, and CCITT are marvels of compromise and persuasion. In the communications field, we have CCITT "recommendations", which are always unanimously approved. That means that representatives from the US and the Soviet Union, Israel and Syria, Iran and Iraq, South Africa and Nigeria, Ireland and England, North and South Korea, and even Lybia, have gotten together and agreed on something. Because standards must compromise, they tend to drift to the lowest common denominator. Only rarely can they elevate the current practice. 3.3. Who Does the Standard Protect? Another popular misconception is that standards protect the consumer: the popular notion of the standards developer as a back- room Ralph Nader who protects the poor buyer from the nefarious abuse of the vendor. Standards don't do a very good job of protecting the buyer. Every lemon I've ever been stuck with met all the applicable standards. Standards do however, provide considerable protection for the supplier. In our case, given test and quality standards, the legal issue of whether or not a piece of software is adequately tested is considerably simplified if there is a standard against which to measure testing thoroughness. A quantifiable quality standard would destroy, once and for all, the perfect software myth. A formal standard for acceptance criteria would go a long way towards not being forced into ludicrous overtesting by a naive buyer with a better lawyer. 3.4. Why is the Process so Slow. Standards evolution is a slow process -- that's good, not bad. There's nothing worse than a hastily conceived standard. For example, the width of our railroad tracks are based on the separation of the wheels on Roman chariots of two thousand years before. The chariot wheel standard was slow in coming but it was hastily adopted for railroads. We're living now with antiquated and hastily conceived standards such as 60 cycle electricity, 525 line TV screens, and almost useless AM radio bandwidths. With all those bad examples around, it's no wonder that standards developers want inertia in the system. But there's a marvelous way to get a defacto standard into being, without making a final commitment -- and I don't mean getting IBM to adopt it. The method is the draft standard. Draft standards can to some extent push the state of the art, propose, and guide. While they don't have the weight of a formal standard, often they're the only thing we can use while the deliberation is going on. If you reject a proposed standard because it's "only a draft" you may be opting to work without a standard for several years or decades. Standards are adopted slowly but they also evolve. Standards start out weak and get stronger with time. It's obvious why. The consensual process is a weakening process. Also, if an initial standard is overly strong, it will be ignored. Alternatively, a prematurely strong standard may so distort the economics that the product never comes to the market. The example is that of orphan drugs, which because of inappropriate testing standards, are not available in the US. The standard is strengthened when the consensus' adoption is almost universal and when, in fact, most of the industry is already working to a higher standard. 3.5. Who Develops the Standards? The popular notion is that of some gurus in the NBS who sit down and dictate a standard, fully developed, when the time is ripe. Actually, you develop the standards which NBS, ISO, or IEEE eventually codify. The typical standards worker is an unpaid, understaffed, and overworked volunteer. The NBS worker is paid to work on standards, but may have dozens of different standards to honcho simultaneously so that her work on any one standard is also part -- disabuse yourself of the notion that there's a vast, well funded, standards development organization out there -- there isn't. There's only a small army of dedicated and unpaid volunteers. You want standards? Help build them? You want to hurry the process? Make the wheel squeak by engaging in a dialogue with the standards groups. You don't like the draft standards? Say so by participating in the process. 3.6. What Standards Do We Need2 Here's a check-list for missing standards or standards which need update. 1. A stronger, more detailed unit testing standard. 2. Comparable standard for integration testing. 3. System testing standard and subsidiary standards for areas within system testing such as security, recovery. 4. Test configuration control and reporting. 5. Quantifiable metrics for software quality. 6. Acceptance criteria and process. 7. Test documentation and audit. 8. All kinds of standards for all kinds of cover. Work continues to be done within the standards community on all of the above. But there are problems ranging from pure research to politics that will take a big army of competent workers a long time to resolve. 4. Solutions and Challenges 4.1. Overview The solution is multi-dimensional: hardware, operating system, language, language processor, statistics, tools, standards, and training. We divide these into what can be done by the system supplier, within your own shop, and as a community. 4.2. Help the Supplier. No supplier of hardware or software can make significant capital investments in products if there's no perception of a market. 1. Establish a dialogue through vendor marketing contacts and user groups. Share. Make your needs known in writing. 2. Prepare draft functional specifications for hardware, operating system, language, language processor, and tools features which support test development and execution. Don't grumble: publish your wish list. 3. Be willing to pay a fair price for value. Support your local tool vendor. 4. Indicate your willingness to pay for tool usage training. 5. Indicate your willingness to buy services where appropriate. 4.3. Internal Measures 1. Wage the good fight for legitimacy. 2. Get a budget for tools. 3. Get a bigger budget for tools training. 4. Implement a robust metrics program. 5. Break down corporate barriers to sharing effectiveness statistics. 6. Adopt the consensus terminology. 7. Get a budget for internal standards development. 8. Adopt the official standards (draft or final) as minimums. 9. Get support for community activities. 10. Educate the lawyers, marketeers, and PR types. 4.4. Community Participation 1. Join and foster test trade associations and special interest groups. 2. Understand the standardization process, support it, actively contribute to it rather than being passive. 3. Do PR work to disabuse users and especially the media of the perfect software myth. 4. Sacrifice short-term, local, interests to long-term, community solutions. ======================================================================== Excellence can be attained if you.... * Care more than others think is wise * Risk more than others think is safe * Dream more than others think is practical * Expect more than others think is possible ======================================================================== New Yahoo! Group for eValid <http://www.e-valid.com> To make it easier for all of the eValid users to communicate with each other about eValid we have set up a new Yahoo! Group for eValid. eValid Yahoo! Group Goals The aim of this group is to have an UN-moderated open forum for eValid users to discuss technical questions and issues. We don't wish to have specific control of what is said; we mainly want to have ALL eValid users have a place where they can come to get current information, post problems, and study prior issues. This is NOT an official eValid group. However, from time to time we here at eValid will respond to users questions and make other postings. When we do that we will be speaking officially for and about eValid and we will identify ourselves appropriately. Also, from time to time we will post individual responses to problems and issues. In doing this we will be very careful to protect the identify of the originator of the issue. We hope that this new open form of communication helps eValid users Finding The New Yahoo! Group for eValid The simplest route to the new Yahoo! Group for eValid is the direct one: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/evalid/> Go to <http://www.yahoo.com> and click on Groups. Then click on "Computers & Internet", then "Software", then "Development", then "Testing", and then click on "evalid". You may find it quicker to go directly to <http://groups.yahoo.com> and then do a search for "eValid". Subscribing, Unsubscribing, Posting Send email to evalid-subscribe@yahoogroups.com to subscribe, to evalid-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com to unsubscribe. Anyone can post messages to evalid@yahoogroups.com. You don't have to be a member to read the postings and the archive material. Software Research, Inc. eValid Division, 1663 Mission Street, Suite 400 San Francisco, CA 94103 USA Phone: +1 415.861.2800. FAX: +1 415.861.9801. Email: info@e-valid.com ======================================================================== ISSTA 2002 Technical Program The just-concluced ISSTA 2002 workshop in Rome, Italy, presented a number of very good papers. The complete technical program and many of the detailed slide presentations are available at: <http://www.iei.pi.cnr.it/ISSTA2002/program.htm> While all of the ISSTA presentations are quite strong, QTN readers who are interested in practical aspects of software quality should see these papers in particular: * Ostrand and Weyuker, "The Distribution of Faults in a Large Industrial Softawre System" * Srivastava and Thiagarajan, "Effectively Prioritzing Tests in a Development Environment" * Moors, Veeraghavan, Tao, Zheng, and Badri, "Experiences in Automating Testing of SS7 Signalling Transfer Points" * Dick Hamlet, "Continuity in Software Systems" ======================================================================== ICSE 2003: 25th International Conference on Software Engineering The Hilton Portland Hotel, Portland, Oregon, May 3-10, 2003 <http://www.icse-conferences.org/2003/> ICSE is the premier software engineering conference. It provides a forum for researchers, practitioners, and educators to present and discuss the most recent advances, trends, and concerns. Items of special interest to software engineering practioners are marked (*). Technical Papers: due Sept. 9, 2002. Technical papers should describe innovative and significant work in the research or practice of software engineering. Papers will be evaluated by the Program Committee on the basis of originality, importance of contribution, soundness, evaluation, quality of presentation, and appropriate comparison to related work. Experience Reports: due Oct. 4, 2002. Experience reports provide in-depth description of experiences in building, using and evolving software systems or processes. Software Engineering Education & Training Papers: due Oct. 4, 2002. This track provides an international forum for discussing topics related to software engineering education and training. Tutorial Proposals: due Oct. 4, 2002. Tutorials are short courses on software engineering practices, techniques, and theories. Tutorials can cover a wide range of topics, from practical techniques, guidelines, standards, and surveys, to theoretical issues. ======================================================================== Quality Is... "Quality is never an accident; it is always the result of high intention, sincere effort, intelligent direction and skillful execution; it represents the wise choice of many alternatives." ======================================================================== CSES 2002 International Workshop on Certification and Security in E-Services Montreal, Canada <http://leonardo.dm.univaq.it/cses2002> The program of the CSES-02 workshop features five sessions, comprising overall four invited speakers (well known experts in issues regarding e-services) plus five contributed full papers and three contributed short papers, selected by the international program committe on the basis of their scientific quality and relevance for the workshop topics. Aims and Scope of the Workshop Certifying the execution of an e-service provided on the network as the result of the interaction among independent organizations is a critical area for the underlying IT-infrastructure. In fact, given the legal value that is often attached to data managed and exchanged during the execution of such an inter-organizational e-service, being able to document what was actually carried out is of the utmost importance. This is made more complex in cases, like it often happens in the public administration sector, where e-services are based on legacy systems managed by autonomous and independent organizations. Additionally, the whole area of security issues, from the more basic ones (availability, authentication, integrity, confidentiality) to the more complex ones (e.g., authorization, non-repudiation) is an equally critical aspect to be able to trace down responsibilities ("who did what"). This capability is mandatory to increase the presence and the use of e-service IT-infrastructures. The two areas have moreover a common technological intersection, since both are based on the reliable and efficient monitoring of executed and running processes. Certification and security are as well fundamental processes in organizational and economic terms. The objective of the workshop is to discuss technical and organizational aspects regarding these two areas and their interrelations, presenting both real-life application experiences and methodological proposals, from participants belonging to the governmental, industrial and academic communities. Inclusion The workshop is within the "Security" Stream of the IFIP-WCC 2002, the 17th World Computer Congress of the IFIP. This is a uniquely rich event featuring 10 distinct Streams on key issues in Information Technology. The "Security" Stream features also one tutorial "Introduction to Computer Security" and one more Workshop "E-Government and Security", thus providing even more opportunities for discussions about security issues in IT-infrastructures in our increasingly digital world. ======================================================================== Edsger Wybe Dijkstra: 1930-2002 A Personal Note: My first meeting with Prof. Dijkstra was at THE in Eindhoven, Netherlands, in the early 1970's, not too long after his "GOTO Statement Considered Harmful" article was published and fomented the Structured Programming Revolution. I was eager and enthusiastic and had wanted to sit at the feet of the master, and he gave of his time generously. To this day I recall him speaking in English ever so carefully and precisely and pointing out why programming languages had difficulty dealing consistently with the semantics of variables. I didn't then understand all the implications fully, and even now today I'm not completely sure of everything that he had in mind. That is the nature of a guru: his thinking is already beyond what you currently can appreciate. But, like all that he did, his answers and observations were profound and entirely thought provoking. In all the times I saw him since my impressions were colored by that very first meeting: calmness, reason, care, politeness, and clarity. His elegant mind will surely be missed. -Edward Miller Professor Edsger Wybe Dijkstra, a noted pioneer of the science and industry of computing, died after a long struggle with cancer on 6 August 2002 at his home in Nuenen, the Netherlands. Dijkstra was born in 1930 in Rotterdam, The Netherlands, the son of a chemist father and a mathematician mother. He graduated from the Gymnasium Erasmianum in Rotterdam and obtained degrees in mathematics and theoretical physics from the University of Leyden and a Ph.D. in computing science from the University of Amsterdam. He worked as a programmer at the Mathematisch Centrum, Amsterdam, 1952-62; was professor of mathematics, Eindhoven University of Technology, 1962-1984; and was a Burroughs Corporation research fellow, 1973-1984. He held the Schlumberger Centennial Chair in Computing Sciences at the University of Texas at Austin, 1984-1999, and retired as Professor Emeritus in 1999. Dijkstra is survived by his wife of over forty years, Maria (Ria) C. Dijkstra Debets, by three children, Marcus J., Femke E., and computer scientist Rutger M. Dijkstra, and by two grandchildren. Dijkstra was the 1972 recipient of the ACM Turing Award, often viewed as the Nobel Prize for computing. He was a member of the Netherlands Royal Academy of Arts and Sciences, a member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and a Distinguished Fellow of the British Computer Society. He received the 1974 AFIPS Harry Goode Award, the 1982 IEEE Computer Pioneer Award, and the 1989 ACM SIGCSE Award for Outstanding Contributions to Computer Science Education. Athens University of Economics awarded him an honorary doctorate in 2001. In 2002, the C&C Foundation of Japan recognized Dijkstra "for his pioneering contributions to the establishment of the scientific basis for computer software through creative research in basic software theory, algorithm theory, structured programming, and semaphores". Dijkstra is renowned for the insight that mathematical logic is and must be the basis for sensible computer program construction and for his contributions to mathematical methodology. He is responsible for the idea of building operating systems as explicitly synchronized sequential processes, for the formal development of computer programs, and for the intellectual foundations for the disciplined control of nondeterminacy. He is well known for his amazingly efficient shortest path algorithm and for having designed and coded the first Algol 60 compiler. He was famously the leader in the abolition of the GOTO statement from programming. Dijkstra was a prodigious writer. His entire collection of over thirteen hundred written works was digitally scanned and is accessible at <http://www.cs.utexas.edu/users/EWD>. He also corresponded regularly with hundreds of friends and colleagues over the years --not by email but by conventional post. He strenuously preferred the fountain pen to the computer in producing his scholarly output and letters. Dijkstra was notorious for his wit, eloquence, and way with words, such as in his remark "The question of whether computers can think is like the question of whether submarines can swim"; his advice to a promising researcher, who asked how to select a topic for research: "Do only what only you can do"; and his remark in his Turing Award lecture "In their capacity as a tool, computers will be but a ripple on the surface of our culture. In their capacity as intellectual challenge, they are without precedent in the cultural history of mankind." Dijkstra enriched the language of computing with many concepts and phrases, such as structured programming, separation of concerns, synchronization, deadly embrace, dining philosophers, weakest precondition, guarded command, the excluded miracle, and the famous "semaphores" for controlling computer processes. The Oxford English Dictionary cites his use of the words "vector" and "stack" in a computing context. Dijkstra enjoyed playing Mozart for his friends on his Boesendorfer piano. He and his wife had a fondness for exploring state and national parks in their Volkswagen bus, dubbed the Touring Machine, in which he wrote many technical papers. Throughout his scientific career, Dijkstra formulated and pursued the highest academic ideals of scientific rigor untainted by commercial, managerial, or political considerations. Simplicity, beauty, and eloquence were his hallmarks, and his uncompromising insistence on elegance in programming and mathematics was an inspiration to thousands. He judged his own work by the highest standards and set a continuing challenge to his many friends to do the same. For the rest, he willingly undertook the role of Socrates, that of a gadfly to society, repeatedly goading his native and his adoptive country by remarking on the mistakes inherent in fashionable ideas and the dangers of time-serving compromises. Like Socrates, his most significant legacy is to those who engaged with him in small group discussions or scientific correspondence about half-formulated ideas and emerging discoveries. Particularly privileged are those who attended his reading groups in Eindhoven and Austin, known as the "Tuesday Afternoon Clubs". At Dijkstra's passage, let us recall Phaedo's parting remark about Socrates: "we may truly say that of all the men of his time whom we have known, he was the wisest and justest and best." ======================================================================== ------------>>> QTN ARTICLE SUBMITTAL POLICY <<<------------ ======================================================================== QTN is E-mailed around the middle of each month to over 10,000 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. TRADEMARKS: eValid, STW, TestWorks, CAPBAK, SMARTS, EXDIFF, 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: <http://www.soft.com/News/QTN-Online/subscribe.html>. As a backup you may send Email direct to as follows: TO SUBSCRIBE: Include this phrase in the body of your message: subscribe TO UNSUBSCRIBE: Include this phrase in the body of your message: unsubscribe 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. QUALITY TECHNIQUES NEWSLETTER 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 Email: qtn@sr-corp.com Web: <http://www.soft.com/News/QTN-Online>