Report on the IFIP W.G. 5.2, Workshop on "Methodology in Computer Graphics" SEILLAC, France, May 23-26, 1976, R.A. GUEDJ, Chairman Graphics Committee
This is a report on a Workshop on Methodology in Computer Graphics which took place in SEILLAC, Prance, May 23-26, 1976. The workshop had been organized by the graphics committee of IFIP's W.G. 5.2. (working group on Computer Aided Design). This committee was set up at W.G. 5.2. meeting in Malmo, Sweden, in August 1974, to initiate an active program directed to standards in computer graphics. After three meetings, the committee decided to hold a workshop which would address methodology in computer graphics, as a preliminary step toward formulating standards.
The need for some standardization in computer graphics is strongly felt by most of the people involved, be they users at different levels, and by public and private institutions. The committee set up to address this need, had, after three meetings - Malmo, Paris, Bellinglise - held in 1974-1975, as a consensus the following opinion: all the existing or prospective packages known at that time, although very useful in some places, could not be considered suitable as the basis for a standard. The reasons were diverse; the main reason always being a lack of clear understanding of the concepts involved. That particular reason was applicable variously to all the graphics packages considered. To a certain extent, that opinion was shared by users, designers and even the implementers of those packages.
In view of this situation, the committee felt that it was premature to initiate specific recommendations on standards. Instead, it decided to address first, more basic issues, seeking to uncover the underlying concepts by holding a workshop on the subject. To avoid all kinds of political pressure often associated with the area of standardization, the workshop concentrating on methodology in computer graphics was to be held by invitation only.
Financial support for the travel expenses of a very small number, 3, of participants was kindly offered by two IFIP-connected institutions. These institutions are gratefully thanked for their contribution. The remaining participants supported themselves or were supported by their institutions.
Twenty-five participants from Europe and North America attended. They brought diverse backgrounds to the Workshop. Their interests ranged from very simple non-interactive to highly sophisticated, interactive graphics systems. The purpose, partially achieved, was to bring together as small a group of practitioners and theoreticians from industry, government and academia, interested in defining the underlying concepts in the use of computer graphics.
The previously agreed upon agenda, more or less followed was: meeting together to review the past, some initial proposals, define general directions, split into small parallel working groups, encourage people to alternate between groups when desirable or needed, encourage joint meetings again to report subgroups progress.
Position papers to address topics relevant to the workshop, together with papers to enrich the environment were provided by most participants; unfortunately not all were available ahead of the workshop. To emphasise the exchange of ideas and the sharing of experiences, most of the time was dedicated to discussions. Therefore there were only short informal presentations of some of the papers.
It is not an easy task to report the complete deliberations of the groups. It would need considerably more work and time, to pull together the bits and pieces scattered in notes taken during and after the formal sessions, during the discussions, or disseminated in position papers. Here we attempt only to report the general directions and the spirit of what was achieved.
Let us state again that the workshop had the rather ambitious goal of making recommendations on methodology in computer graphics, not on standards, and thereby seek to establish a more solid basis for standards in the field. It is too soon to assess whether we have reached that goal. Hopefully, what we have achieved can be viewed as a positive contribution outlined below in preliminary remarks and guidelines, some leading to specific recommendations. A set of working notes called documents, some attributed to a subgroup or to specific participants, has been gathered. Although even in a very rough form they will certainly be very useful for further work in this area. Another contribution to the graphics community might be to select some of the submitted papers and consider them for publication as a set of proceedings together with the notes taken during the discussions. This will be decided after some feedback on this report is received.
The results of the Workshop are the result of the collective work of the subgroup participants. Special credit for the write-ups and notes could be given to some participants who headed a subgroup or volunteered a written contribution. However, following a wish expressed at the last session, working documents considered as such are identified only by the names of the subgroups or by number only when related to several subgroups.
All the participants are thanked for their contribution and for the spirit in which they made it.
Special mention should go to Barbara Liskov for her contribution to make us aware of the importance of formal specification techniques, to Malcolm Sabin, for the efficient digestion he made to review a rich and not very structured past, to Bert Herzog for his efficient chairmanship of importance sessions.
In addition to his workshop contribution, Hugh Tucker put in a lot of work and acted kindly and efficiently as technical secretary. Also Tom Sancha, Bob Hopgood and Jose Encarnacao deserve special mention for their contribution during the preparation phase. Besides their work in the subgroups Jean-Claude Ballegeer and Bernard Gagey provided all manner of practical assistance. Madame Caradec's efforts, particularly in connection with the work of transcription, typing and reproduction during the workshop is appreciated by all the participants.
The two institutions, mentioned above in relation to financial support for travel expenses are: Gesellschaft fur Mathematik und Datenverarbeitung, Germany, and the Institut de Recherche en Informatique et Automatique, France.
