Safety-Critical Mailing List Archive 1998
By Date

• [Safety-relevant] Disaster series on BBC2 TV, UK Jonathan Moffett
• position available in safety analysis Peter Lindsay
• [Safety-relevant] Disaster series on BBC2 TV, UK Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-relevant] Reminder: deadline for Human Error Workshop abstracts Jonathan Moffett
• Ada for safety Brian Wichmann
• Re: Ada for safety John McDermid
• Re: Ada for safety Brian Wichmann
• CfP Special Issue on Formal Methods for Visual Interaction Jonathan Moffett
• CfP Special Issue on Formal Methods for Visual Interaction Jonathan Moffett
• Northern FM workshop - safety related Bob Fields
• [Safety-relevant]:Northern FM workshop - safety related Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-relate] Summer School Announcement Jonathan Moffett
• Safety related workshop johnson(at)dcs.gla.ac.uk
• CFP IEEE Internet Computing - Mobile Code SAFETY Gary McGraw
• [Safety-related] Advance Program - ISORC '98 Jonathan Moffett
• Safety -related research position - York Bob Fields
• Use of Microsoft Word for safety-critical applications Jonathan Moffett
• Re: Use of Microsoft Word for safety-critical applications Iain J Bate
• Re: Use of Microsoft Word for safety-critical applications Peter B. Ladkin
• Testing for safety CEN meeting Brian Wichmann
• Microsoft Safety Software - Not Charles Waite
• Re: Microsoft Safety Software - Not Jon DAVIES
• Re: Use of Microsoft Word for safety-critical applications -Reply James Stewart
• Re[2]: Use of Microsoft Word for safety-critical application Mark_Bowell(at)hsl.gov.uk
• Re: Re[2]: Use of Microsoft Word for safety-critical application Pete Mellor
• Re: Use of Microsoft Word for safety-critical applications-Reply Charles Waite
• Workshop: User Interfaces for Safety Critical Systems Bob Fields
• OTS / Safety Jeffrey M. Voas
• HUMAN COMPUTER INTERFACE / HUMAN ERROR ANALYSIS IN SAFETY APPLICATIONS Sandro Bologna
• [Safety-related]: New Mailing List on Validation and Verification Jonathan Moffett
• Software System Safety Class Nancy Leveson
• ISESS 99 including safety standards Land, Kathy
• [Safety] temporal or timeline tool? marie-odile Bes
• Re: [Safety] temporal or timeline tool? Andy Dearden
• RE: [Safety] temporal or timeline tool? Roger Searjeant
• Re: [Safety] temporal or timeline tool? Peter B. Ladkin
• RE: [Safety] temporal or timeline tool? Richard.Scaife(at)aeroint.com
• Workshop on Human Error and Safety (announcement) leveson(at)sunnyday.mit.edu
• ISESS 99 including safety standards Land, Kathy
• ISESS 99 including safety standards Land, Kathy
• IEEE Safety Study Group Victoria Stavridou
• Re: IEEE Safety Study Group Janusz Zalewski
• Re: IEEE Safety Study Group Lon D. Gowen, Ph.D.
• RE: IEEE Safety Study Group Luedeke, Jonathan F
• RE: IEEE Safety Study Group mweber(at)systemsafety.com
• Re: IEEE Safety Study Group parodrig(at)estec.esa.nl
• Re: IEEE Safety Study Group Joao Batista
• Re: IEEE Safety Study Group Lon D. Gowen, Ph.D.
• Re: IEEE Safety Study Group Pete Mellor
• [Safety-related]:14th ACSAC Call for Papers Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: CFP - Computer Communications Special Issue on FDTs in Practice Jonathan Moffett
• MSc courses in Safety Critical Systems Engineering & Software Engineering Jonathan Moffett
• Lister on Risk: NOT TO BE MISSED! (Safety comes into it somewhere!) Pete Mellor
• Re: IEEE Safety Study Group Vijay Vaishnavi
• C++ for safety Brian Wichmann
• Re: C++ for safety Mike Holcombe
• Re: C++ for safety Frank Renpenning
• Re: C++ for safety Paul Krause
• Re: C++ for safety Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: C++ for safety Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: C++ for safety Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: C++ for safety Viv Hamilton +44 1245 242233
• Re: C++ for safety Viv Hamilton +44 1245 242233
• Re: C++ for safety Paul Krause
• Re: C++ for safety Pete Mellor
• Re: C++ for safety Lon D. Gowen, Ph.D.
• Re: C++ for safety Peter B. Ladkin
• RE: C++ for safety Garlington, Kennie E
• Re: C++ for safety Pete Mellor
• Re: C++ for safety Pete Mellor
• Re: C++ for safety Nancy Leveson
• Re: IEEE Safety Study Group matmdf(at)lochness.CS.Gsu.EDU
• Re: C++ for safety Steve Palmer
• Re: C++ for safety Pete Mellor
• Re: C++ for safety Frank Renpenning
• RE: C++ for safety Garlington, Kennie E
• [Safety-related]: C++ can work... Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: So, things built with C++? Like Windows NT? Windows 95? Jonathan Moffett
• RE: C++ for safety Jon DAVIES
• RE: C++ for safety Royalty, Chuck
• Re: C++ for safety jim_k_jaskol(at)corp.disney.com
• Re: C++ for safety Brenton Atchison
• RE: C++ for safety Janusz Zalewski
• Re: C++ for safety Peter B. Ladkin
• RE: C++ for safety Martyn Thomas
• Re: C++ for safety Steve Palmer
• RE: C++ for safety John McDermid
• Scientist/Senior Scientist (safety in title 8) Risoe johnson(at)dcs.gla.ac.uk
• Scientist/Senior Scientist, Risoe, Safety in title (2) johnson(at)dcs.gla.ac.uk
• Re: C++ for safety Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: C++ for safety Tom Anderson
• Quantitative System Safety Luedeke, Jonathan F
• Re: C++ for safety Nancy Leveson
• Safety contribution of software Paul Gruhn, P.E.
• Re: C++ for safety Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: C++ for safety Pete Mellor
• RE: C++ for safety Garlington, Kennie E
• Re: C++ for safety Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: C++ for safety Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: C++ for safety Steve D White
• Re: C++ for safety Garlington, Kennie E
• Re: Quantitative System Safety Victoria Stavridou
• Re: Quantitative System safety Martyn Thomas
• C++ and Safety: moderated discussion by way of Jonathan Moffett
• C++ and Safety: moderated discussion by way of Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: Reminder: FORTE/PSTV'98 call for papers Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: CFP - Special session in FORTE/PSTV'98 Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: Reminder: FORTE/PSTV'98 call for papers Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: CFP - Special session in FORTE/PSTV'98 Jonathan Moffett
• Re: IEEE Safety Study Group Jim Woodcock
• Re: Safety contribution of software jon hind
• Re: Safety contribution of software Paul Gruhn, P.E.
• Re: C++ (or Ada) for safety; Ariane 5 Ian Pyle
• C++ and Safety: moderated discussion Jonathan Moffett
• Re: C++ and Safety: moderated discussion Pete Mellor
• Re: C++ for safety (cf. Java) Jonathan Bowen
• Re: C++ for safety (cf. Java) Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: C++ (or Ada) for safety; Ariane 5 Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: C++ for safety (cf. Java) Brian Wichmann
• Re: C++ for safety (cf. Java) Jonathan Bowen
• Re: C++ for safety (cf. Java) Jonathan Bowen
• Colloquium on Real-Time Systems (not specifically safety) Iain Bate
• Re: C++ for safety (cf. Java) Peter B. Ladkin
• CFP for a Special Issue of the IEE Proceedings - Software Engineering (not specifically safety) Iain Bate
• Re: C++ for safety (cf. Java) Jonathan Bowen
• Re: C++ for safety (cf. Java) Mark T Miller
• Certification and Safety Brian Wichmann
• ADA Run Time System Checks vs. Defensive Programming for Safety Critical Systems Paul Gatland
• Re: ADA Run Time System Checks vs. Defensive Programming for Safety Critical Systems Stuart Palin 01634 844400 Ext 4197
• RE: ADA Run Time System Checks vs. Defensive Programming for Safety Critical Systems John McDermid
• Re: ADA Run Time System Checks vs. Defensive Programming for Safety Critical Systems Brian Wichmann
• Microsoft licennses and safety-critical applications Jonathan Moffett
• Safety positions available Nancy Leveson
• Re: CFP for a Special Issue of the IEE Proceedings - Software Engineering (not specifically safety) Rogerio de Lemos
• Documentation safety Ann Wrightson
• Jobs: Product Safety Engineer and others Jon DAVIES
• Fallacious [safety] arguments Jonathan Moffett
• Re: Fallacious [safety] arguments Richard Bolt
• Re: Fallacious [safety] arguments Pete Mellor
• Re: Fallacious [safety] arguments Pete Mellor
• Safety goals as opposed to safety by standard? nikola.kanuritch(at)bae.co.uk
• Safe for Safety's sake? nikola.kanuritch(at)bae.co.uk
• Re: Safety goals as opposed to safety by standard? Ross Hannan
• Re: Safety goals as opposed to safety by standard? Andy Dearden
• RE: Safety goals as opposed to safety by standard? Cooper Phil
• Re: Safety goals as opposed to safety by standard? Paul Gruhn, P.E.
• RE: Safety goals as opposed to safety by standard? John McDermid
• Safety goals as opposed to safety by standard? -Reply James Stewart
• Safety goals as opposed to safety by standards Felix Redmill
• RE: Safety goals as opposed to safety by standards John McDermid
• CFP: DCCA-7 (safety related) Chuck Weinstock
• safety workshop CFP Peter Lindsay
• [Safety-related]: Success Tree Analysis Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: CFP: Tool Support for System Specification, Development and Verification Jonathan Moffett
• Re: [Safety-related]: Success Tree Analysis Nancy Leveson
• safety - positions available Virginia Garton
• Safety - position Virginia Garton
• Safety (another) position Virginia Garton
• Safety Standard Brian Wichmann
• RE: Safety Standard John McDermid
• RE: Safety Standard Luedeke, Jonathan F
• RE: Safety Standard Brian Wichmann
• RE: Safety Standard Pete Mellor
• RE: Safety Standard IEC 61508 Tony Foord
• Spreadsheets of Safety Brian Wichmann
• Re: Spreadsheets of Safety Mario R. Barbacci
• Re: Spreadsheets of Safety Brian Wichmann
• Re: Spreadsheets of Safety Mario R. Barbacci
• Re: Spreadsheets of Safety Brian Wichmann
• [Safety-related]: FEmSys'99 - First Announcement/Call for Exhibitors Jonathan Moffett
• Re: Spreadsheets of Safety Brian Wichmann
• IEEE Software Safety Presentation Jeffrey M. Voas
• Language Style for Safety-Related Documents Jon DAVIES
• Re: Language Style for Safety-Related Documents Paul Krause
• Re: Language Style for Safety-Related Documents Peter B. Ladkin
• RE: Language Style for Safety-Related Documents Cooper Phil
• Re: Language Style for Safety-Related Documents Peter B. Ladkin
• Software, Requirements and System parts (and safety, for the filter) Ann Wrightson
• Re: Language Style for Safety-Related Documents Viv Hamilton +44 1245 242233
• Allocation of Safety Integrity Levels Braband Jens
• RE: Language Style for Safety-Related Documents paul.edwards(at)roverpte.demon.co.uk
• [Safety-related]: Software, Requirements and System parts Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: ISW'98 - Call for Participation Jonathan Moffett
• RE: Language Style for Safety-Related Documents MCLELLAN Alexander
• Re: Allocation of Safety Integrity Levels Brian Wichmann
• Re: Allocation of Safety Integrity Levels Ross Hannan
• MISRA 'Guidelines for the use of the C language in vehicle based software' - now published [safety related] paul.edwards(at)roverpte.demon.co.uk
• Re: Language Style for Safety-Related Documents Pete Mellor
• [Safety-related]: Ada validation Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: CFP: Speciall Issue on Middleware Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: Re: Ada validation Jonathan Moffett
• European Summer School on RELIABILITY AND SAFETY OF HUMAN-MACHINE SYSTEMS Massimo Felici
• Safeware: Masterclass in Software Safety Tony Foord
• ICECCS'98/SES'98 Advance Program (including safety) - Call for Registration John Harauz
• Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Peter B. Ladkin
• RE: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk John McDermid
• RE: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk John McDermid
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Peter Bishop
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Braband Jens
• RE: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Bruce Elliott
• A good paper by Les Hatton: On N-Version Design Techniques for Safety-Critical Applications Jie Xu
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Tom Anderson
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Nancy Leveson
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Nancy Leveson
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Nancy Leveson
• RE: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Royalty, Chuck
• RE: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk John McDermid
• Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Felix Redmill
• RE: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Charles Hoes
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Charles Hoes
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Peter Bishop
• Re: A good paper by Les Hatton: On N-Version Design Techniques for Safety-Critical Applications Nancy Leveson
• Re: A good paper by Les Hatton: On N-Version Design Techniques for Safety-Critical Applications Nancy Leveson
• RE- safety definitions ..... nikola.kanuritch(at)bae.co.uk
• RE: A good paper by Les Hatton: On N-Version Design Techniques fo r Safety-Critical Applications Garlington, Kennie E
• Re: A good paper by Les Hatton: On N-Version Design Techniques fo r Safety-Critical Applications Victoria Stavridou
• RE: A good paper by Les Hatton: On N-Version Design Techniques fo r Safety-Critical Applications Garlington, Kennie E
• Oops! RE: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Royalty, Chuck
• Re: A good paper by Les Hatton: On N-Version Design Techniques fo r Safety-Critical Applications Victoria Stavridou
• Re: RE- safety definitions ..... Charles Hoes
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Ann Wrightson
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Nancy Leveson
• RE: A good paper by Les Hatton: On N-Version Design Techniques fo r Safety-Critical Applications Garlington, Kennie E
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Charles Hoes
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk nikola.kanuritch(at)bae.co.uk
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk James Bret Michael
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk James Bret Michael
• RE: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk John McDermid
• [Safety-related]: call for papers: Dependable Computing for Critical Applications Jonathan Moffett
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Ann Wrightson
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Nancy Leveson
• [Safety-related]: CSR/Newcastle - PhD Studentships Jonathan Moffett
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Bruce Elliott
• Safety standard Brian Wichmann
• RE: Safety standard Garlington, Kennie E
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk James Bret Michael
• Re: Safety standard Tom Anderson
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Premkumar Devanbu
• RE: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Ostrand, Thomas
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk James Bret Michael
• RE: Safety standard John McDermid
• IEC Safety Standard IanPyle(at)aol.com
• Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk Tony Foord
• [Safety-related]: DCCA cfp Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: Use of risk assessment in engineering Jonathan Moffett
• RE: IEC Safety Standard Garlington, Kennie E
• RE: [Safety-related]: Use of risk assessment in engineering Ellis, Dori
• Re: [Safety-related]: Use of risk assessment in engineering jim_k_jaskol(at)corp.disney.com
• Re: Safety Definitions of Hazard and Risk James Bret Michael
• RE: IEC Safety Standard UK72
• [Safety-related]: Quality Week Europe '98 - Call for Papers Jonathan Moffett
• Safety with C++ ? Dr. Zech, Karl-Adolf
• (no subject) SALES
• WorldSafety News July 98 {Enviro, Safety, Fire} Mike Blazedell
• 00-56 Safety Standard on-line Bruno Dutertre
• Year2000: chemical process safety Tony Cox
• [Safety-related] Senior Lectureship at Univ of York Jonathan Moffett
• RE: Year2000: chemical process safety Sniezek, Daniel
• Re: Year2000: chemical process safety Mike Falla
• Re: 00-56 Safety Standard on-line gifford.court(at)dera.gov.uk
• (not specifically safety) Special Issue on Real-Time Systems Iain Bate
• Safety Critical Club events Tom Anderson
• Adelard Safety Case Development Manual Robin Bloomfield
• Report on safety critical R&D programme on net Jonathan Moffett
• Prof. Nancy Leveson's Masterclass in Software Safety Jonathan Moffett
• IEEE Software Call for Papers and Reviewers Jeffrey M. Voas
• RE: IEEE Software Call for Papers and Reviewers John McDermid
• [Safety-related]: COMPASS Task Force of the IEEE Computer Society Jonathan Moffett
• Re: [Safety-related]: COMPASS Task Force of the IEEE Computer Society Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: [Safety-related]: COMPASS Task Force of the IEEE Computer Society Lon D. Gowen, Ph.D.
• Re: [Safety-related]: COMPASS Task Force of the IEEE Computer Society Nancy Leveson
• Re: [Safety-related]: COMPASS Task Force of the IEEE Computer Society Mario R. Barbacci
• safety related: NFMW'98 - Call for Participation Bob Fields
• {WorldSafety.com}Sept. News-FedSafe'98/Jobs/Regs/Round-up & more Mike Blazedell
• [Safety-related]: FMDS'98 Jonathan Moffett
• safety-critical design - general info Dirk Tilsner
• RE: safety-critical design - general info Paul Gatland
• Ada for safety Brian Wichmann
• Re: safety-critical design - general info Ross Hannan
• "FEmSys99_SECOND_Announcement" Axel Poigne
• Safety of SMART instruments Brian Wichmann
• SES'98 OTS Proceedings Jeffrey M. Voas
• Safety Management Software Information
• [Safety-related]: Quality Week Europe '98 (QWE'98) Jonathan Moffett
• Objective testing for safety Ann Wrightson
• [Safety-related]: TCS'99 CONFERENCE -- Call for Contributions Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: ISSRE '98 Advance Registration Jonathan Moffett
• Re: [Safety-related]: ISSRE '98 Advance Registration Pete Mellor
• Preliminary CFP ISSRE'99 Jeffrey M. Voas
• Re: Objective testing for safety Janusz Zalewski
• Safety related research poosition - York Bob Fields
• Re: Objective testing for safety IanPyle(at)aol.com
• Re: Objective testing for safety Brian Wichmann
• Call for Participation: HASE'98 Bojan Cukic
• Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] paul.edwards(at)roverpte.demon.co.uk
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Brian Wichmann
• Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] - retry to fix formatting(?) paul.edwards(at)roverpte.demon.co.uk
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Ross Hannan
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Brian Wichmann
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Darren Buttle
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Peter B. Ladkin
• Are compilers safe Brian Wichmann
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Darren Buttle
• Re: Are compilers safe Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Joao Batista
• WorldSafety.com -News, Update and Big Machine Safety Chat Mike Blazedell
• WorldSafety.com -News, Update and Big Machine Safety Chat Mike Blazedell
• Re: Are compilers safe Nancy Leveson
• Re: Are compilers safe Brian Wichmann
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Darren Buttle
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Peter B. Ladkin
• Compilers and micros Brian Wichmann
• Re: Are compilers safe Nancy Leveson
• Safety bugs Brian Wichmann
• Re: Safety bugs Nancy Leveson
• Re: Compilers and micros Peter B. Ladkin
• RE: Compilers and micros Martyn Thomas
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity o Peter Bishop
• Safety-related book Janusz Zalewski
• Some Resources on Software Failures Jonathan Moffett
• [Safety-related]: RE: Are compilers safe Jonathan Moffett
• RE: Safety bugs John McDermid
• RE: Safety bugs Peter Bishop
• Re: Safety bugs Peter B. Ladkin
• RE: Safety bugs John McDermid
• [Safety-related]: Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity o Jonathan Moffett
• RE: Safety bugs Jonathan Bowen
• RE: Safety bugs Jonathan Bowen
• Re: [Safety-related]: Re: Which tools or software are most crit Peter Bishop
• Re: Safety bugs Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: Safety bugs Nancy Leveson
• Re: Safety-related book Janusz Zalewski
• [Safety-related]: Oops, typo Jonathan Moffett
• Re: Safety bugs Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: Safety bugs Nancy Leveson
• Re: [Safety-related]: Re: Which tools or software are most crit Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: [Safety-related]: Re: Which tools or software are most crit Peter Bishop
• Re: Safety-related book James Bret Michael
• Re: Safety bugs Peter Bishop
• Re: [Safety-related]: Re: Which tools or software are most crit Peter B. Ladkin
• RE: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] paul.edwards(at)roverpte.demon.co.uk
• RE: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Andy Ashworth
• Re: Slander Tom Anderson
• RE: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] paul.edwards(at)roverpte.demon.co.uk
• RE: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] paul.edwards(at)roverpte.demon.co.uk
• Re: Which tools or software are most critical to the integrity of the product? [safety] Viv Hamilton +44 1245 242233
• Re: Safety-related book Andrew Vickers
• Interesting Conference Alberto Pasquini
• [Safety-related] Computer Science Lectureships at Univ of York Jonathan Moffett
• Safety, Ada and Java Brian Wichmann
• Looking for microcontrollers for highly safety critical systems Maas Elmar
• Re: Looking for microcontrollers for highly safety critical syst Peter Bishop
• System Safety Society Conference -- Call for Papers Dixon, Jack
• Invitation - QRA discussion group Jan Erik Vinnem
• RE: Are compilers safe DAVIES, Jon
• RE: Are compilers safe Pete Mellor
• Are compilers [safety]? Jonathan Moffett
• Re: Safety, Ada and Java Brian Wichmann
• Inappropriate use of automatic replyon Safety list Jonathan Moffett
• Safety and formal methods Robin Bloomfield
• Re: System Safety Society Conference -- Call for Papers Dixon, Jack
• Public domain examples of the use of ALARP [safety]? richard.evans(at)roverpte.demon.co.uk
• Re: Public domain examples of the use of ALARP [safety]? Peter B. Ladkin
• RE: Public domain examples of the use of ALARP [safety]? Martyn Thomas
• RE: Public domain examples of the use of ALARP [safety]? Brian Wichmann
• RE: Public domain examples of the use of ALARP [safety]? Roger Searjeant
• Re: Public domain examples of the use of ALARP [safety]? Tim Kelly
• RE: Public domain examples of the use of ALARP [safety]? Roger Searjeant
• Re: Public domain examples of the use of ALARP [safety]? Brian.Bibb(at)eos.elekta.com
• RE: Public domain examples of the use of ALARP [safety]? Roger Searjeant
• [safety] ALARP Tony Cox
• RE: Public domain examples of the use of ALARP [safety]? UK72
• RE: [safety] ALARP Andy Dearden
• Re: ALARP and standards nikola.kanuritch(at)bae.co.uk
• Re: [safety] ALARP Peter B. Ladkin
• ALARP, etc. Tony Cox
• [Safety-related]: Re: ALARP, etc. Jonathan Moffett
• RE: [safety] ALARP Andy Dearden
• RE: [safety] ALARP John McDermid
• [Safety] DEPENDABLE COMPUTING FOR CRITICAL APPLICATIONS Jonathan Moffett
• "FEmSys99:_Call_for_Participation/Program" Axel Poigne
• Correctness and safety Jonathan Moffett
• Correctness and safety Brian Wichmann
• Re: Correctness and safety Peter B. Ladkin
• Re: Correctness and safety Brian Wichmann
• re: Correctness and safety Klaus Brunnstein
• re: Correctness and safety Brian Wichmann
• Validating Critical Data John McDermid
• [Safety-related]: Re: Validating Critical Data Jonathan Moffett

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue 21 Aug 2001 - 16:10:48 BST