162 
comparable images should be taken from the same place 
and at the same time of the year and of the day and at 
comparable weather and light conditions. Again, we need 
some good rules for monitoring by photography. Without 
such simple rules for monitoring we may have another 
gap. 
4. INTERNATIONAL CO-OPERATION FOR DOCU 
MENTATION AND MONITORING OF CULTURAL 
HERITAGE 
International Co-operation for Documentation and 
Monitoring of Cultural Heritage is something very 
advisable for many reasons: 
♦ Cultural Heritage of the same type and from the same 
time is distributed across the borders of today, 
because the Roman Empire, the Byzantine Empire or 
the Austrian-Hungarian Monarchy had different areas 
of influence. Classical Archaeology, Byzantinistic 
research, or studies on Austrian Youth Style are thus 
automatically international. Many institutions and 
scientific societies work internationally and their 
results should be available for all relevant national 
institutions. This is not yet well organised in all cases. 
A gap has been found. 
♦ Egyptian artefacts can be found today in London, 
Paris, Berlin, Vienna and in many other towns outside 
Egypt. The same can be said about the Greek and 
many other monuments. Scientific research, e.g. 
comparisons or completions, need co-operation, 
bridging borders, access to data of other nations. 
This is not yet easily possible everywhere. We have 
located another gap. 
♦ World Heritage monuments, the top monuments of 
mankind under protection of UNESCO, are observed 
internationally. Documentation and Monitoring of 
World Heritage sites must follow some realistic 
standards otherwise its management would fail. The 
standards for their documentation are not yet 
completely defined. We have another gap. 
♦ Some countries are rich enough to do documentation 
and monitoring of the Cultural Heritage by 
themselves. Others have severe problems and need 
help. Help must come in time before it is too late, 
before damage, decay or demolition threatening by 
normal decay or by stupidity, after revolution or by 
war or by other catastrophes: inundation’s, storms, 
earthquakes. If the richer countries don’t help, we 
recognise a severe gap, and mankind could be the 
loser. 
♦ Some countries have the know-how and are grown 
up and ripe to do proper documentation, others are in 
hands of politicians who need all the money of future 
generations for momentary projects, only. Here we 
see a mental gap which has to be bridged. Mental 
gaps need education and communication. Internet 
and international co-operation are good means for 
mutual information, technical know-how-transfer and 
education. 
5. CIPA'S EXPERT AND WORKING GROUPS 
Cl PA has Expert Groups - organised according to an 
ICOMOS - ISPRS matrix of working areas for CIPA Board 
Members, National and Committee Delegates and for all 
co-operating experts of the world for a free dialog on 
problems related to the documentation of the Cultural 
Heritage. It is an open forum, a market place for the 
discussion of problems and proposals and for mutual 
expert assistance, for information and education. Each 
working area has two observers ("Chairpersons of Expert 
Groups") who are connected to the CIPA Working Groups 
which learn this way about problems and proposals 
perhaps not yet considered. One can make contacts and 
invite interesting and interested personalities and top 
experts to take part in the activities of the Working 
Groups. The Working Groups have a well defined 
programme, selected, evaluated and approved by the 
Expert Advisory Board of CIPA. This Expert Advisory 
Board consists of all chairpersons and co-ordinators of 
Expert and Working Groups of CIPA. There is another 
Advisory Board in CIPA, the Delegates Advisory Board. It 
is growing fast and has now already members from about 
30 countries. Its tasks are communication between CIPA 
and the member countries of ICOMOS and ISPRS as well 
as realisation of proposals in the home countries. 
The permanent Working Groups and the not permanent 
Task Groups have the following aims and tasks: 
Working Group 1 : 
Documentation & Documentation Management. 
The Working Group is discussing the future of Heritage 
Documentation and working on recommendations. Further 
it plans for international workshops with the aim to 
encourage more experts to get in contact with CIPA and 
to really understand, develop and forward its mission. 
Chairman is the Vice-President of CIPA, Robin Letellier, 
Canada. 
Working Group 2: 
Heritage Information Systems (HIS) 
has no strategic plan developed yet for the organisation of 
the HIS-Chaos in the world. But now it seems that 
Internet-Networking provides an acceptable solution. 
Chairman is Bosse Lagerqvist, Goeteborg, Sweden. 
Working Group 3: 
Simple Photogrammetric Systems 
is under new chairmanship of Spain and France. Antonio 
Almagro, Spain, developed and combined a field 
photogrammetric system, which is rather simple and 
cheap. P. Grussenmeyer together with Pierre Drap, 
France, contributed with an internet based restitution 
program. Andre Streilein, the Netherlands, prepared a 
simple rectification program for the internet. The Working 
Group shall test, compare and adjust besides the 
professional systems with priority ready-to-use, low-cost 
and simple systems. 
Working Group 4: 
Digital Imagery and Virtual Reality 
is under the chairmanship of Klaus Hanke, Innsbruck, 
Austria, and Andre Streilein, Delft, The Netherlands, and 
is booming with many papers concerning the know-how 
transfer from ISPRS into the users world of ICOMOS. 
Digital imaging, measurement and visualisation 
techniques have changed the documentation approach 
and offer new possibilities which should be tested, 
compared and developed for prosperous and more