Editorial

This article presents information on the August 2003 issue of the "Journal of Hospitality & Tourism." One of the aims of the journal is to provide a link between the hospitality, tourism, leisure, travel and event industries and academia. As in previous years, the author had attempted to achieve this aim by using the mid-year issue of the journal to disseminate research from recent academic conferences to a wider audience. An understandable criticism of academic research, and the usefulness of the information generated, centres around the length of time research results take to filter through to industry. Academic conferences have traditionally been the forum where university academics present findings from recently completed research or present a synopsis of work completed to date in the form of work in progress abstracts. The focus of this issue is to develop a closer relationship between industry and academia through the publication of papers from two recent hospitality and tourism research conferences

How do we justify knowledge produced within interpretive approaches?

The use of interpretive approaches within management and organizational sciences has increased substantially. However appropriate criteria for justifying research results from interpretive approaches have not developed so rapidly alongside their adaptation. This article examines the potential of common criteria for justifying knowledge produced within interpretive approaches. Based on this investigation, appropriate criteria are identified and a strategy for achieving them is proposed. Finally, an interpretive study of competence in organizations is used to demonstrate how the proposed criteria and strategy can be applied to justify knowledge produced within interpretive approaches.

Fractal effects on the measurement of the specific surface areas of single-walled carbon nanotubes

The specific surface area (SSA) of single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWNTs) has been measured by different groups. Fujiwara et al. measured the SSA of SWNT bundles by using nitrogen and oxygen as adsorbates, and found that the SSA from O2-adsorption was 6.6% larger than that from N2-adsorption for the same SWNT sample [1]. Also Wei et al. [2] measured the SSA of HiPco SWNTs by using O2, N2 and Ar, and found that, for the same samples, Vm(Ar) > Vm(O2) > Vm(N2), here Vm is the monolayer adsorption capacity at the standard conditions of temperature and pressure (STP). Those research results indicate that, for the same SWNT sample, its measured surface area depends on the employed adsorbate.

Beyond the sphere of the English facial approximation literature: Ramifications of German papers on western method concepts

In the English literature, facial approximation methods have been commonly classified into three types: Russian, American, or Combination. These categorizations are based on the protocols used, for example, whether methods use average soft-tissue depths (American methods) or require face muscle construction (Russian methods). However, literature searches outside the usual realm of English publications reveal key papers that demonstrate that the Russian category above has been founded on distorted views. In reality, Russian methods are based on limited face muscle construction, with heavy reliance on modified average soft-tissue depths. A closer inspection of the American method also reveals inconsistencies with the recognized classification scheme. This investigation thus demonstrates that all major methods of facial approximation depend on both face anatomy and average soft-tissue depths, rendering common method classification schemes redundant. The best way forward appears to be for practitioners to describe the methods they use (including the weight each one gives to average soft-tissue depths and deep face tissue construction) without placing them in any categorical classificatory group or giving them an ambiguous name. The state of this situation may need to be reviewed in the future in light of new research results and paradigms.

Proceedings of the 2004 Australian Software Engineering Conference

Established in 1986, ASWEC is the premier technical meeting for the Australian Software Engineering Community, and attracts a significant number of international participants. The conference is sponsored by both Engineers Australia and the Australian Computer Society. The major goal of the conference is to provide a forum for exchanging experience and new research results in software engineering. The technical program for ASWEC 2004 includes research papers from Australia and across the world. This year we received 79 submissions from 12 countries: 56 from Australia, 6 from New Zealand, 9 from Asia, 4 from Europe, and 4 from North America. All papers were fully refereed by three (two papers by only two) Program Committee members. We accepted 36 papers to be presented at the conference. We are grateful to all authors who contributed to ASWEC 2004. In addition to the technical papers, the conference program also includes two keynote speakers and one panel on Software Engineering accreditation. We are very pleased about being able to attract Philippe Kruchten, University of British Columbia, and Ian Hayes, The University of Queensland, as the keynote speakers for this conference.

Proceedings of the 2005 Australian Software Engineering Conference

Established in 1986, ASWEC is the premier technical meeting for the Australian software engineering community, and attracts a significant number of international participants. The major goal of the conference is to provide a forum for exchanging experience and new research results in software engineering. To increase the industry participation at ASWEC, we organized two separate paper tracks, which we have called Research Papers and Industry Experience Reports. These paper tracks had separate deadlines, separate program committees, separate review procedures, and separate proceedings. The Research Papers appear in these proceedings and the Industry Experience Reports will appear on a CD-Rom that will be distributed at the conference. The Research Papers track for ASWEC 2005 includes submissions from Australia and across the world. This year we received 79 submissions from 13 countries: 48 from Australia, 7 from New Zealand, 11 from Asia, 9 from Europe, and 2 each from North and South America. All papers were fully refereed by three Program Committee members. We accepted 34 papers to be presented at the conference. We are grateful to all authors who contributed to ASWEC.

AMS dating of rock art in the Laura Region, Cape York Peninsula, Australia - protocols and results of recent research

The authors describe rock art dating research in Australia using the oxalate method While the array of dates obtained (which range from c. 1200 to c. 25000 BP) show a satisfactory correlation with other archaeological data, there are mismatches which suggest that some motifs were often imitated by later artists, and/or that the mineral accretions continued to form periodically, perhaps continuously, as a regional phenomenon over a long period of time.