Figure 1: Participants in the On-line Debate
Skipper, M. and Hand, C. ``TaTTOO'95 On-Line: A Report''. In Proceedings of TaTTOO'95: Teaching and Training in the Technology of Objects. De Montfort University, Leicester, UK. January 4-6 1995.
TaTTOO'95 On-line (TOL) was an Internet-based sister event to the TaTTOO'95 conference. Since TOL itself had some of the features of a conference (such as a panel session and a trade exhibition), it may be referred to as a "virtual conference". In this case, it is helpful to describe the events which took place at De Montfort University (DMU) as the "Real-Life" (or RL) conference.
This paper describes the hardware and software technology which enabled the on-line events to take place, followed by a description of the Virtual Exhibition and the On-line Debate. A transcript of the debate may be found in Appendix 1.
One of the reasons for holding on-line events was to make it possible to bring together Object Technology professionals from all over the world, regardless of their ability to physically travel to Leicester. A number of organisations had contacted the conference organisers expressing an interest in exhibiting, but were concerned that they might be unable to travel to DMU. This presented an interesting challenge to the organisers as to how best to provide a service which would allow organisations to be "tele-present" at the TaTTOO conference, possibly from the other side of the world.
The technology which was used to realise the on-line facilities was a combination of text-based virtual reality and the World-Wide Web (see Section 2).
It was considered by the organisers that the on-line events should compliment the real-life conference experience by extending it into the domain of the Internet, and by allowing many more people to be a part of TaTTOO'95 than would otherwise be the case. It was also a useful opportunity to try out some of the technology and to see how it might fit into a conference context.
The on-line events were enabled using two main software technologies: World-Wide Web and MOO.
The World-Wide Web (Berners-Lee et al, 1992), also known as "WWW", "W3" or just "the Web", is an interconnected mesh of information stored on many different computers distributed throughout the world. The structure of the web represents the relationships between the data. A user may "browse" the Web, following hypertext links from one "node" to another.
Using Web browsers such as Mosaic or Netscape it is possible to work with Internet-based services through a user-friendly graphical interface. Many media types, such as graphics, audio and MPEG animations are supported, so that multimedia documents and services may be created. A resource on the Web is specified by a unique identifier known as a Uniform Resource Locator or URL. An example is:
http://www.cms.dmu.ac.uk/People/cs-people.html
This particular URL points to the "home page" of De Montfort University's Department of Computer Science. HTTP is Hypertext Transfer Protocol, the mechanism used to move hypertext documents around the Web. The rest of the URL specifies an Internet host name, followed by a document path.
MOO (MUD [1], Object-Oriented) is a multi-user virtual world in which users interact with one another in real time by typing text commands and reading the results from the screen (Curtis and Nichols, 1994). Although on paper this sounds rather primitive, MOOs have been found to be extremely useful tools for bringing a community of professional users together on-line (Bruckman and Resnick, 1993). By adding WWW support to the MOO it may become a collaborative hypermedia system, allowing multi-user interaction with structured documents and services on the Web (Meyer, Blair and Hader, 1994).
The virtual worlds are built by creating software objects for locations, people, books and so on. The properties of these objects are defined in the MOO's built-in Object-oriented Programming language.
In order to integrate the two technologies of MOO and WWW, the MOO server had to be augmented to support HTTP requests, a mechanism also known as WTP - WOO Transaction Protocol (Campbell and Epstein, 1994). Luckily the MOO's programming language is sufficiently expressive to allow all this to be done without modification to the underlying server.
The MOO which was set up specially for TOL was given the name "TaTTOO/MOO".
A number of hardware systems supported the on-line events (see Figure 1).
The MOO software was run on an IBM RS/6000 server provided by IBM (ISSC Service Delivery systems), Portsmouth, UK. This machine was located in Portsmouth, but thanks to the help of the system administrator there it was possible to install and manage the MOO server over the Internet.
Figure 1: Participants in the On-line Debate
A 486 IBM PC-compatible machine was set up in the exhibition area of the TaTTOO'95 conference building, running Microsoft Windows with MOO and WWW clients. This machine enabled TaTTOO'95 delegates to participate in the on-line events during breaks in the RL conference.
A laboratory containing 32 Hewlett Packard 9000/720 workstations running UNIX and X-Windows was set up as an "Internet Room" for the use of TaTTOO'95 delegates. This laboratory, located in a separate building to the rest of the RL conference events, was used by panel members and some of the audience during the on-line debate.
The TaTTOO'95 (RL) conference delegates were able to join the debate in a seminar room in the conference building. This room contained a PC machine connected to the Internet, with a projection panel displaying the screen to everyone in the room. A "mediator" was present to operate the machine and to submit questions to the panel in the virtual world at the request of the audience. The remainder of the audience was made up of "virtual delegates", connected to TaTTOO/MOO from various parts of the world via the Internet.
For 24 hours a day throughout TaTTOO'95 the Virtual Exhibition was open to anyone on the Internet and to delegates of the real-world conference. The intention was to enable exhibiting organisations to meet customers, discuss business and give out documentation interactively in real time over the Internet. The exhibition facilities had been set up some time in advance and exhibitors were encouraged to set up their stands as early as possible.
Each exhibitor was provided with the following facilities:
As the TOL system is integrated with the Web, all exhibition facilities (stands, leaflets, robots and even the exhibitors themselves) were represented as hypertext documents and could therefore contain formatted text, images and links to other documents.
This facility was used to great effect by companies with their own WWW server, such as Iona Technologies, Ubique and De Montfort University who all had hypertext leaflets containing links to documents held on their own servers. Others, such as Eiffel Ireland and Objectshare, capitalised on the opportunity to have their own personal Web presence for the first time during the event. The TOL team provided assistance with preparation of hypertext documents in Hypertext Mark-up Language (HTML) format.
The facilities are described in more detail in (Hand and Skipper, 1995). The full list of exhibitors can be found in Appendix 2.
Delegates connected to TaTTOO/MOO could wander around the stands and interact with exhibitors or their robots and collect leaflets and promotional material. At registration, delegates were given a conference badge as well as a supply of personalised business cards that they could give away to exhibitors or other delegates.
Each delegate was represented by an object in TaTTOO/MOO and thus had a personal WWW "home page". Delegates' Web pages featured a bullet list of (links to) all the objects which the delegate had collected in the exhibition, making it easier to browse leaflets or other documents.
The debate took place in the afternoon[2] of 5th January, 1995. Although the moderator and most of the invited panel were situated in one RL location at De Montfort University Leicester, the debate was a truly virtual event as the rest of the participants were distributed throughout the globe.
The debate panel were invited to a brief practice session just before the main event and they soon picked up the simple skills necessary to express themselves in the MOO. Despite a minor networking problem just as the debate got underway, everything went smoothly and participants soon forgot the novelty of the technology as they became more engaged in the discussion. Over 30 users participated in the debate: Internet users, TaTTOO delegates at DMU, and the panel themselves.
Members of the invited panel are listed below.
An early comment from Eric Leach lead the discussion to the subject of the use of Object Technology in education at GCSE level. Fortunately Pauline Butcher of the College of St Mark and St John, Portsmouth, was able to add the weight of her experience in training IT instructors to teach information systems modelling using Object Technology.
The arrival of Ross O'Crowley of Iona Technologies (producers of a CORBA
The full transcript of the debate can be found in Appendix 1.
Interactive media are becoming increasingly important in the context of Technology Transfer, and the Internet is likely to become more involved in scholarly and commercial events as we head into 1995 and beyond.
Although the Internet is already well-used for personal information exchange (such as e-mail), TaTTOO'95 On-line shows that it can also be used to host public events such as the on-line debate. As the transcript of the debate (Appendix 1) reveals, participants quickly adapt to the technology allowing focused, valuable discussion to take place. The success of this event indicates that the technology already exists to bring people together from all over the Internet, so they may collaborate in a supportive environment.
T.J. Berners-Lee, R. Cailliau, J-F Groff, B. Pollermann, CERN, "World-Wide Web:
The Information Universe", "Electronic Networking: Research,
Applications and Policy", Vol. 2 No 1, pp. 52-58 Spring 1992, Meckler
Publishing, Westport, CT, USA.
<URL: http://www.w3.org/pub/www/doc/ENRAP_9202.ps>
A. Bruckman and M. Resnick. "Virtual Professional Community: Results from the
MediaMOO project", Proceedings of 3CyberConf, The Third International
Conference on Cyberspace, May 1993.
<URL: file://media.mit.edu/pub/asb/papers/MediaMOO-3cyberconf.txt>
J. Campbell and S. Latt Epstein. "WTP - WOO Transaction Protocol". June 1994.
<URL: http://sensemedia.net/108>
P. Curtis and D. Nichols. "MUDs Grow Up: Social Virtual Realities in the Real
World". Proceedings of the 1994 IEEE Computer Conference, San Francisco,
February 1994.
<URL: file://parcftp.xerox.com/pub/MOO/papers/MUDsGrowUp.txt>
C. Hand and M. Skipper. "TaTTOO'95 Online: A Virtual Trade Exhibition".
Computer-Mediated Communication Magazine, Volume 2 Number 2, February 1995.
<URL: http://sunsite.unc.edu/cmc/mag/1995/feb/toc.html>
T. Meyer, D. Blair and S. Hader. "A MOO-based collaborative hypermedia system
for WWW". Proceedings of the Second International WWW Conference: Mosaic and the Web. Chicago, Illinois (USA). October 7-20, 1994.
<URL: http://www.cs.brown.edu/people/twm/wwwmoo.html>
The authors would like to acknowledge the assistance of Robert Armstrong, Jay Campbell, Samuel Latt Epstein and Paul Kautz, who conceptualised and designed MOO/WWW integration and lead the first implementations. JaysHouseMOO, ChibaMOO and BioMOO provided the inspiration for adding Web support to TaTTOO/MOO.
Sincere thanks go to Alister Lewis-Bowen of IBM, Portsmouth (UK), for his time and effort in looking after the server machine. Thanks also to Alan O'Callaghan, Ray Farmer and Paul Luker for their help and encouragement.
What follows is an edited version of a transcript of the panel session. The original transcript was created by logging to a file everything that appeared on the screen of one participant.
The Panel Chair (Eric Leach) and the Moderator (Chris Hand) were present in the Internet Room, while the Mediator (Mark Skipper) presented questions from the audience in the RL conference building, who were able to observe the on-line events on a projection screen (see Figure 1).
Lecture Theatre 1 (0.10)
a level-floored lecture room shaped like an amphitheatre. There is a
whiteboard and overhead projector at the front.
Exits: `out' to Central Atrium
The room is now configured in Panel Discussion format.
To ask a question: "ask YOUR QUESTION HERE"
To or just "request" or "raisehand" to speak.
Chris is currently moderating the discussion.
Discussion is currently limited to 1 speakers.
The topic of discussion is: Interoperability, CORBA and Object Skilling
A nearby speaker crackles into life: Bing Bong!
Wizard announces, "the debate is ready to begin
if you're not already there please type 'goto #95'"
PaulLuker says, "Welcome to De Montfort University Leicester.
We appear to be having network problems!
Please bear with us."
PaulLuker is Feeling lonely!
[ some more people arrive ]
PaulLuker Says "ah that's better."
Chris is now the moderator.
Maximum number of speakers set to 5
PaulLuker . o O ( "Things are looking up." )
A nearby speaker crackles into life: Bing Bong!
Wizard announces, "ATTENTION PLEASE. After a minor (!) network fault the debate
will proceed in 2 minutes. please 'goto #395' to teleport to the Lecture
Theatre"
Chris [to Mark]: "Are you with us, Queens Building?"
The moderator calls on EricLeach.
The moderator calls on JohnDaniels.
Chris says, "WELCOME! As you can see, this is a leading-edge event, with the
usual problems. We have a panel of Industry and Academia pundits..."
Chris points to the panel
JohnDaniels says, "hello"
Chris says, "I'll take a back seat now as Eric Leach is going to chair"
Chris [to EricLeach]: "ready?"
EricLeach says, "Welcome To TaTTOO 95 -- On-Line !
This is an interactive debate, please join in."
PaulLuker says, "Welcome from me, too!"
EricLeach says, "I'm Eric Leach, UK representative of the OMG.
OT is gaining widespread acceptance.
Projections reveal that OT software platform revenues will exceed
7 billion dollars by 1997 But, the move to OT is not a simple one.
It involves a radically different approach - a paradigm shift,
a mind-set change.
How will industry and education rise to this challenge ?"
Chris offers questions to the floor
EricLeach says, "please respond."
Chris says, "type 'raise' if you wish to ask a question"
PaulLuker says, "Education and industry face similar but distinct challenges
Industry and education have to face the real problem of people having
to change their mind set."
PaulineButcher says, "If we are to bring OT in as the main approach in school
GCSE syllabus will some of this money be going towards suitable
cheapsoftware for schools"
PaulLuker says, "For those starting computing for the first time, there is
nothing more natural than beginning with OO!"
PaulineButcher says, "I agree"
PaulLuker says, "But how do the rest of us shift our paradigms? More later!"
The moderator calls on CamilloSars.
JohnDaniels says, "most people don't start their computing with 'proper'
programming."
EricLeach [to PaulineButcher]: "How many years will it take to get OT on the
school GCSE sylabus ? and how will it get done ?"
PaulLuker says, "There is a fundamental question of whether or not that is the
right place for it."
JohnDaniels says, "They are writing "programs" before they start programming."
CamilloSars says, "What about OT modelling? I have yet to see a very good OO
modelling technique."
PaulineButcher says, "I am training IT teachers now to teach GCSE IS modelling
using OT, we will be tring out ideas in Devon schools this spring"
PaulLuker [to PaulineButcher]: "That is good news! However, experience of GCSE
and A level computing students at university has not been good!"
PaulineButcher says, "But I will need help with suitable case studies, and to
Camillo we must do this using modelling, and so need a GOOD technique
which is available to lay persons"
JohnDaniels [to PaulLuker]: "Why have A level students not done well?"
PaulLuker [to JohnDaniels]: "Because they have been taught poorly (on the whole)
and have to unlearn. Another paradigm shift!"
EricLeach says, "From the Chair: What do we all feel about getting OT on the
school GCSE sylabus and how ?"
JohnDaniels says, "Won't the paradigm problem get better when things like the
macro langauges for spreadsheets, etc. are O-O?"
EricLeach says, "From the Chair: further, should OT be introduced at PRIMARY
school level ?"
JohnDaniels looks expectantly
PaulLuker says, "Yes. That, I feel, is the best thing for schools to do --
stay at the appropriate level of abstraction, at problem, not machine
level."
Chris grins
PaulineButcher says, "The GCSE IT!! syllabus already say pupils must 'model'
an information handling system, so we must train proper IT teachers"
PaulLuker says, "I have no problem with that!"
PaulineButcher says, "OT can (and probably is) used in problem solving using
CBT already, but of course teachers are not aware of it"
PaulLuker feels tense. Wishes he could type better.
EricLeach says, "From the Chair: How are we going to persuade the Government to
allocate funds to teach TEACHERS OT ?"
PaulLuker says, "I feel very strongly that schools, universities and industry
should work together to articulate a clear IT strategy from primary
school up."
PaulLuker [to JohnDaniels]: "I wouldn't hold your breath!"
PaulLuker says, "Should have directed that last reply to Eric. Sorry."
The moderator calls on Mark.
Mark says, "Wayne Harris asks:
is OO modelling stable enough to be taugh at school?"
JohnDaniels [to WayneHarris]: "If you mean, in the form of a particular method,
I'd say no."
PaulLuker says, "Briefly, no. But modelling in general (simulation) would be
useful."
JohnDaniels [to WayneHarris]: "but the principles could be taught."
PaulLuker says, "I agree"
EricLeach [to PaullineButcher]: "What will be the vehicle for schools,
Universities and industry to work together ?"
PaulineButcher says, "OT can (and probably is) used in problem solving using
CBT already, but of course teachers are not aware of it"
The moderator calls on JohnArnold.
JohnArnold says, "How many children actually learn to program
at PRIMARY school though?"
PaulLuker says, "Programming is not the issue.
That's the least of our problems.
It's cultivating and fostering the mind set that is important."
JohnArnold says, "I think the method of teaching through problem solving is
excellent.. but that was secondary school
(when I was at school anyway)"
PaulLuker . o O ( "What School is this?" )
PaulLuker says, "The older I get, the less important I think programming is!"
JohnDaniels [to PaulLuker]: "Yes, when I'm dead I won't think programming
important at all :-)"
PaulLuker luaghs hysterically
PaulLuker explains: a luagh is a nervous laugh
The moderator calls on Mark.
PaulineButcher says, "Simulation and modelling is another strand of GCSE IS,
and OT is very suited to this, which shows its strength over
SSA, also there is a piece of educational software MODELBUILDER which
is based on objects where each object is essentially a data value,
it is so 'natural' that should be usable in schools"
Mark says, "Don Kavanagh asks:
is it relevant to teach OO techniques to primary school when the
technology will be obsolete in 20 years"
PaulLuker [to Don]: "I don't think the level of abstraction at which OO
requires you to thinik will be dead in 20 years! And the technology
will not be obsolete, but subsumed."
The moderator calls on JohnArnold.
JohnArnold says, "Mark I suppose you believe Cobol and Fortran are obsolete
now then?"
The moderator calls on Mark.
Mark says, "Don says:
COBOL IS dead! but the level of abstraction will raise
beyond that of OT, significantly in 20 years"
The Moderator offers TonyDurham's question: "Certain employers are using
personality tests to identify people who can 'never' learn the OO mindset.
Do the assembled pedagogues believe there is such a thing
as a person who cannot be taught OO?"
PaulineButcher says, "Some children are learning to program 'logo' at school,
but remember what we want to take into education is OT not
necessarily OOP"
PaulLuker [to TonyDurham]: "The answer has to be yes."
PaulLuker [to PaulineButcher]: "I agree."
JohnDaniels [to TonyDurham]: "Anyone who can master computing in general
can master OO."
The moderator calls on JohnArnold.
JohnArnold says, "Saying that someone cannot be taught (assuming we're talking
about an experienced programmer in another language) is a crime...
That's one of the reasons older people in this country find it so hard
to get jobs"
JohnDaniels [to TonyDurham]: "But it might take a long time......"
The moderator calls on SimonParker.
SimonParker says, "What distinguishes OT is that it enables you to model
at any level of abstraction, high or low, analysis to programming.
Eiffel allows you to use the same notation from top to bottom"
PaulLuker [to JohnDaniels]: "I have found that older people are often
better!"
PaulLuker [to JohnDaniels]: "My remark was not intended to be ageist."
The moderator calls on JohnArnold.
JohnArnold says, "My point is that anyone can learn OT. Esp if they already
have an IT background"
EricLeach [to TonyDurham]: "As there are good, bad (and absolutely brilliant)
procedural programmers -- I can't see any good reason why that
shouldn't apply to OT programmers."
The moderator calls on CamilloSars.
PaulLuker [to JohnArnold]: "If they are prepared to think differently.
I have worked with a lot of people in the SF Bay Area who have not been
so prepared and have really struggled with OT. There are many who feel
that you cannot teach a paradigm shift. It has to be experienced."
The moderator calls on SimonParker.
SimonParker says, "An OO notation allows you to describe a car and an RS232
port with equal ease. That's what's new. OT can be taught to
non-programmers too."
JohnDaniels [to PaulLuker]: "Surely experiencing it is part of teaching it?"
The moderator calls on JohnArnold.
JohnArnold says, "Paul: Yes it's hard to learn (I, myself, had a lot of
difficulty) but someone who can analyse a problem sufficiently to
write any program can surely learn it?"
The moderator calls on CamilloSars.
CamilloSars says, "Regarding OT becoming obsolete - My opinion is that we
should always teach the most current techniques. In 20 years OT may be
obsolete, but the kids who now learn it will be able to use it then.
If we do not teach OT, what will they have in 20 years?"
The Moderator offers RossO'Crowley's question:
"I thought we were here to talk about Interoperability (i14y)"
PaulLuker [to JohnDaniels]: "There is a lot that can be taught -- experiencing,
though is in the eye of the experiencer.
The teacher is merely a facilitator.
It's a bit like psychiatry -- the psychiatrist cannot help
someone who doesn't want to be helped (ever so deep down.)"
PaulineButcher says, "Yes, part of our problem at the moment is that we do not
really teach any understand of IS in school but concentrate on
skills only so pupils are leaving school now with far less
'knowledge' than justifies the money spent on technology"
EricLeach says, "from the Chair: Let's change the subject (thanks Ross !).
When do we think interoperability will become a reality ?
... and what will drive this ?"
The Moderator offers CamilloSars' question:
"First could someone define interoperability?"
PaulLuker says, "As a user, I want interoperability as of yesterday."
JohnDaniels [to EricLeach]: "Not until products that combine distribution
with database transactions exist."
Chris [to RossO'Crowley]: "Do you anything to add?"
The moderator calls on SimonParker.
SimonParker says, "From my point of view, interoperability means mixed
language development. That comes for free if you aim for distributed
object management. CORBA is the beginning of I14Y..."
JohnDaniels [to SimonParker]: "Parker What is I14Y?"
SimonParker says, "i14y is what someone just called Interoperability!
EricLeach [to CamilloSars]: "Interoperability means I never have to worry
about anything not working with aniything else. For example, plugging
any printer into my PC."
PaulLuker says, "It might be useful to know the current position of OMG and
CORBA."
SimonParker says, "There's another side to interoperability, and that is
co-operation between languages within one executable (or process)"
JohnDaniels says, "Sorry, I have to leave now to prepare for my workshop
session."
PaulLuker says, "What are the main obstacles to interoperability?"
The moderator calls on RossO'Crowley.
[ time passes ]
PaulLuker . o O ( Am I alone? )
RossO'Crowley says, "This has been difficult for me here as the Internet
seems to running slow and I haven't seen much of the
converstaion. However, the OMG has now given the world
a real solid basis for interoperabiltiy between CORBA
systems."
Chris points out that it's useful to enter short sentences
so we don't have to wait
PaulLuker says, "How many CORBA-compliant systems are now beyond beta
release?"
EricLeach [to PaulLuker]: "By Q3 this year, we'll have CORBA 2.0
implementations and you won't have to worry about wheter the objects
created will interoperate with other implementations.
This maybe is the beginning of interoperability in the computer world.
With 500 companies and over a 1,000 software developers at work
throughout the world can continue to make accelerated progress in this
area. <end of advertisement>"
PaulLuker [to EricLeach]: "That's what I wanted to hear!"
The Moderator offers BernhardMerkle's question:
"Is there a bridge between CORBA and OLE ?"
EricLeach [to PaulLuker]: "There are over 20 CORBA 1.2 systems beyond beta."
RossO'Crowley says, "Here at IONA [more advertisment] we've been shipping a
CORBA system since June 1993."
PaulLuker [to EricLeach]: "Is there much need for CORBA training in industry?"
(I found a lot of ignorance in the US among OMG members!)"
RossO'Crowley says, "There are a number of CORBA/OEL [COM] developments in
progress and the OMG is just about to issue an RFP for CORBA/COM
interoperability"
EricLeach [to BernardMerkle]: "There are some proprietary developments in
this area, but OMG is soliciting technology submissions.
IBM, Microsoft, SyBase and APM are awaiting a full distributed OLE
specification before they complete their request for technology."
A nearby speaker crackles into life: Bing Bong!
Wizard announces, "Real-life TaTTOO'95 conf events continue at 15:15"
EricLeach [to PaulLuker]: "Yes there is.
Watch out for McGraw-Hill book on ORBs, Ovum's report on ORBs.
Learning about CORBA could pay off in the job market in a
big way, beginning mid 95."
PaulLuker says, "Before I go, many thanks to Chris Hand and "the team"
for making this possible. Thanks, too, to all participants."
EricLeach says, "From the Chair: we are now at the end of our
interactive debate. I want to thank all the people who participated
and apologise to all those who didn't get their questions debated.
A final big thanks to Chris Hand for wrestling with all the technology!
Here's to the next time! Goodbye !"
Chris says, "Thanks very much to Eric Leach and the rest of the panel,
and to whichever minor deities brought the network back to life...
Can I just point out that the exhibition will continue until Friday
evening. Please feel free to visit the stands and meet exhibitors
If you'd like to carry on conversing, please move outside.
Type 'out' to leave. Thank you again everyone"
A nearby speaker crackles into life: Bing Bong!
Wizard announces, "Virtual Exhibition Hall is #379....
type 'goto #379' to teleport there.
The Virtual Exhibition will run all day today and tomorrow
This event is also on the world-wide web at
http://www.europe.ibm.com:7777/379"
The table below shows the name of all the organisations who had stands in the Virtual Exhibition, along with the total number of different delegates who visited the stand during the event.
Exhibitor Visitors
IBM 51
De Montfort University 42
Iona Technologies 39
Eiffel Ireland 34
Sensemedia 34
The Smalltalk Archive 34
BCS OOPS 28
Interface Workshop 26
DataServ 24
Ubique Ltd 23
Integral Solutions Ltd 19
Objectshare Systems, Inc. 15