The closed-door meeting on Sunday - the first official contact between both sides since recent rioting in Tibet propelled the issue into international prominence - ended with merely an agreement to meet again at an 'appropriate time', reported China's official Xinhua news agency.

There was no indication, however, of when or where they would meet again.

The outcome was in line with the low expectations for the meeting, which many observers regard as an attempt by Beijing to douse growing calls for a boycott of the August Olympics, following China's clampdown on the anti-government protests in Tibet in mid-March.

But some analysts said that this willingness to continue talking could still be seen as progress - however limited - given that the two sides avoided the worst-case scenario of a bitter break in talks.

Beijing and the envoys of the Dalai Lama engaged in six rounds of formal talks between 2002 and last year, but achieved little progress.

'Amid all the rhetoric and given the current state of things, the fact that they agreed to see each other again at all is a hopeful sign,' said law professor Michael Davis of the Chinese University of Hong Kong, who has closely studied the previous negotiations.

Indeed, a Xinhua commentary issued late on Sunday said with uncharacteristic optimism that it hoped the latest meeting would be 'a step in the right direction'.

This echoed similar comments by President Hu Jintao, who told a group of Japanese journalists earlier on Sunday that he hoped for a 'positive outcome' from the meeting.

Mr Thubten Samphel, a spokesman for the Tibetan government-in-exile in the northern Indian hill town of Dharamsala, was quoted by Agence France-Presse as saying that it was 'vital' the channels of communication were being kept open.

He added: 'It is also very good that China agreed to honour a meeting later.'

But there had also been mixed signals from Beijing, which kept up a barrage of fierce criticism against the Dalai Lama even as the latest meeting convened in Shenzhen.

A commentary in the official Tibet Daily on Sunday labelled the Dalai Lama as a 'loyal tool of international anti-Chinese forces'. The newspaper followed up with another harshly-worded article yesterday accusing him of 'monstrous crimes'.

Some analysts cite these criticisms as evidence that Beijing might not be sincere in its offer to talk. Others, however, see the harsh rhetoric as an attempt by the Chinese leadership to balance pressures from the hardline camp, which is said to oppose any dialogue with the Dalai Lama or a softer stance on the Tibet issue.

The opaqueness surrounding Beijing's thinking on the issue is unlikely to be cleared up any time soon given the lack of information on its internal debates or decision-making process.

But what is obvious, analysts said, is that Beijing has a new-found appreciation for the public relations value of its talks with the Tibetan envoys.

In the past, China adopted a 'don't ask, don't tell' approach to its talks with the Tibetan government-in-exile.

But Sunday's meeting was reported on the same day by Xinhua, which also identified Chinese officials involved in the talks, and carried their comments.

Photographs of previous meetings were also posted on online news portals popular with mainland readers.

'The information coming through is designed to placate international opinion,' said Prof Davis. 'It also shows the Chinese are trying to get ahead of the Tibetan public relations effort.'

ADDITIONAL REPORTING BY SIM CHI YIN

chinhon@sph.com.sg