<html xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Helvetica;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Verdana;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Aptos;}
@font-face
{font-family:"Segoe UI";
panose-1:2 11 5 2 4 2 4 2 2 3;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle22
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Aptos",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
mso-ligatures:none;}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style>
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple" style="word-wrap:break-word">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Got it.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Since 2016, the spec has already adopted alternative terminology along the lines you proposed.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">But over the past 7+ years, something I’ve noticed is that some people—a minority, I think—have continued to use “master” instead of “instance”. Your original document was a case of that. My impression has
been that this comes, in part, from past familiarity with Adobe Multiple Master fonts, though that is a bit odd since “instance” was already used in relation to MM fonts. E.g.,<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20090330131435/http:/partners.adobe.com/public/developer/opentype/index_mult_master.html">Developer Resources (archive.org)</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://www.lcdf.org/type/">LCDF Type Software</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://freetype.org/freetype2/docs/reference/ft2-multiple_masters.html">Multiple Masters - FreeType-2.13.2 API Reference</a><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">It could also stem from contexts like FreeType documentation (see link above) that continue to refer to “Multiple Masters” two decades after Adobe stopped selling or offering tech support for MM fonts.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Or, perhaps it stems from seeing “master” used in the context of development workflows and under-appreciation that the data contained in OT variable fonts is not the same as what might be used in sources.
Glyphs for example, continues to talk about “masters”. But also distinguishes that term from “instances”:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">“<b>Masters</b> are <i>what you draw.</i> They are the <i>input</i> for the ensuing interpolation. …
<b>Instances</b> or styles are <i>what the computer calculates.</i> They are the <i>output,</i> the exported <i>result</i> of the interpolation.”<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://glyphsapp.com/learn/multiple-masters-part-1-setting-up-masters">Multiple Masters, part 1: setting up masters | Glyphs (glyphsapp.com)</a><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">(This article reflects a MM conceptualization, the only difference being that instances are generated by the font developer, not by a MM font user. It doesn’t take into consideration variable fonts.)<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">As for use of the term “master” in the context of font development workflows, I think that’s outside the scope of the OT / OFF spec. The only reason “master” was included in the terminology section in OT 1.8
was to clarify that the term is not directly relevant to OT as a distribution format. If a different term for font development workflows became conventional, “master” could certainly be removed from the OT / OFF spec terminology.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Peter<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"><o:p> </o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> Skef Iterum <skef@skef.org>
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Monday, March 11, 2024 1:49 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Peter Constable <pconstable@microsoft.com>; Dave Crossland <dcrossland@google.com><br>
<b>Cc:</b> mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [EXTERNAL] Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] "master" terminology<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<table class="MsoNormalTable" border="0" cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" align="left" width="100%" style="width:100.0%">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="background:#A6A6A6;padding:5.25pt 1.5pt 5.25pt 1.5pt"></td>
<td width="100%" style="width:100.0%;background:#EAEAEA;padding:5.25pt 3.75pt 5.25pt 11.25pt">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="mso-element:frame;mso-element-frame-hspace:2.25pt;mso-element-wrap:around;mso-element-anchor-vertical:paragraph;mso-element-anchor-horizontal:column;mso-height-rule:exactly">
<span style="font-size:9.0pt;font-family:"Segoe UI",sans-serif;color:#212121">You don't often get email from
<a href="mailto:skef@skef.org">skef@skef.org</a>. <a href="https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification">
Learn why this is important</a><o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</td>
<td width="75" style="width:56.25pt;background:#EAEAEA;padding:5.25pt 3.75pt 5.25pt 3.75pt;align:left">
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<div>
<p>I thought by the context of what I was responding to that it would be clear I was offering another alternative to "master", which some people (regardless of etymology, see GitHub) may want to change. Note that I don't have strong opinions on that either
way; I didn't bring it up.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>As far as my use of that term in the document that started this thread, I had already changed that before the last meeting, as I noted on the list in a different message.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Skef<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 3/11/24 13:07, Peter Constable wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Skef:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">It’s not clear to me in what context you’re suggesting new terminology. You had used it in your doc on CFF2 stem hints in a way that appeared to mean any runtime-selectable variation of the font. The OT and
OFF specs already use the terminology “design-variation instance”, “design instance”, “variation instance” or simply “instance” for that meaning. The things listed in the ‘fvar’ table are already referred to as “named instances”, both in the spec and in common
parlance. And, as I pointed out earlier, “master” is defined in the spec as having to do with source data in a font development workflow— I don’t think that’s inconsistent with what Dave has said.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Font face:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> A logical collection of glyph data sharing specific design parameters, along with associated metric data, and names or other metadata.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Variation instance:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> A font face corresponding to a particular position within the variation space of a variable font.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Named instance:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> A variation instance that is specifically defined and assigned a name within the 'fvar' table.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Master:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> A set of source font data that includes complete outline data for a particular font face, used in a font-development workflow.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">(See <a href="https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/typography/opentype/spec/otvaroverview#terminology">
Terminology</a>.)</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt">Peter</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif"> mpeg-otspec
<a href="mailto:mpeg-otspec-bounces@lists.aau.at"><mpeg-otspec-bounces@lists.aau.at></a>
<b>On Behalf Of </b>Dave Crossland via mpeg-otspec<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Sunday, March 10, 2024 10:52 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> Skef Iterum <a href="mailto:skef@skef.org"><skef@skef.org></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> mpeg-otspec <a href="mailto:mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at"><mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at></a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> [EXTERNAL] Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] "master" terminology</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Hi<o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Personally I am all for changing master/slave naming to primary/secondary, but master is not only contrasted with slave. I have a master's degree. My father was a ship's master. Chess players are masterminds. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Mastering is a process in music production, and this is where the word comes to font production from, in my opinion. I don't see this use in opentype as similar at all to say database replication. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">If we are going to change it, don't think 2 words is going to stick. "Sources", perhaps. <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Cheers<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Dave<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Sun, Mar 10, 2024, 11:36<span style="font-family:"Arial",sans-serif"> </span>PM Skef Iterum via mpeg-otspec <<a href="mailto:mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at">mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<p>Had a shower thought this evening: What about "design instance"? And then calling what is the list in fvar, when there is a need to differentiate, a "user instance"? This would be, in effect, extending the distinction between design coordinates and user
coordinates to instances.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>One thing I like about this is that it doesn't carry the heavy weight connotation that "master" seems to, in that it seems natural to talk about the "design instance" of a whole font or of a single glyph, while using "master" for the latter doesn't seem
quite right. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p>(A single word would be easier but those tend to be taken one or twice over at this late date.)<o:p></o:p></p>
<p>Skef <o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On 2/5/24 13:32, Hin-Tak Leung wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">For some of its current usage, the word "master" can be replaced with "primary". The other usage, and in plurals, "masters" (as in variable fonts) are really corner states / extremas . There
is probably a better word to mean a "pure instance" of some sort?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif">"primary/primaries" probably can work? "primary source data"? "Source primary"?</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div id="m_711922894709741043ydp344c07a4yahoo_quoted_7998069860">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">On Monday, 5 February 2024 at 21:04:50 GMT, Thomas Phinney
<a href="mailto:tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu" target="_blank"><tphinney@cal.berkeley.edu></a> wrote:
</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div id="m_711922894709741043ydp344c07a4yiv6692309986">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#26282A">IIRC, we had a (very lengthy!) discussion of this same issue internally at FontLab back when I was CEO.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#26282A">We never came up with an alternate word that seemed workable for the font data concept. “Main” really does seem
<i>singular</i> in a way that “master” is not necessarily.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#26282A">If somebody proposes a good alternative word, I expect people would be happy to entertain a change request—I just couldn’t think of something.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Verdana",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div>
<div id="m_711922894709741043ydp344c07a4yiv6692309986yqt72332">
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 12:53 PM Hin-Tak Leung via mpeg-otspec <<a href="mailto:mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at" target="_blank">mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at</a>> wrote:</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">That reminds me - the git/git[hub,lab,...] people have been moving away from "master" as the name of the default branch, to "main", because of the word's colonial connotations.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Maybe the opentype spec should avoid the word "master" for that reason too.</span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div id="m_711922894709741043ydp344c07a4yiv6692309986m_-641728661922181094ydp987cb2bcyahoo_quoted_7521758938">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">On Monday, 5 February 2024 at 20:44:15 GMT, Peter Constable via mpeg-otspec <<a href="mailto:mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at" target="_blank">mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at</a>>
wrote: </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">Hi, Skef<br>
<br>
The term "master" should not be used in the way you have in this doc. The variations overview section uses the term, defining it as "a set of source font data... used in a font-development workflow". It could be used elsewhere in the spec with that meaning,
but the wording should make clear that it refers to source data. <br>
<br>
In your doc, it's not clear whether you mean "instance" or a default value combined with a (not attenuated) delta. The latter concept necessarily has to refer to some specific value in the font, which could be an outline coordinate, a metric value, or any other
single, variable value. But when it comes to data in the font file there is nothing that corresponds to a source master.<br>
<br>
<br>
A question about this: I gather that this would require changes in CFF2 rasterizers?<br>
<br>
<br>
Peter</span><o:p></o:p></p>
<div id="m_711922894709741043ydp344c07a4yiv6692309986m_-641728661922181094ydp987cb2bcyqtfd48815">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A"><br>
-----Original Message-----<br>
From: mpeg-otspec <<a href="mailto:mpeg-otspec-bounces@lists.aau.at" target="_blank">mpeg-otspec-bounces@lists.aau.at</a>> On Behalf Of Skef Iterum via mpeg-otspec<br>
Sent: Monday, February 5, 2024 3:23 AM<br>
To: <a href="mailto:mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at" target="_blank">mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at</a><br>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] [MPEG-OTSPEC] Relaxation of CFF2 hint requirements (?) in variable fonts<br>
<br>
A short proposal to relax the requirements on stem hints in a CFF2 variable font should be attached. These changes (or clarifications -- see below) are comparable to allowing overlap in CFF2; what could easily be normalized away in a static context winds up
being needed in a variable context.<br>
<br>
Note that these changes do not affect the storage format, and one could argue that one or even both is compatible with the current standard (given that nothing much is said on the subject). Still, they may raise issues about versioning. My sense is that if
a font built according to the clarifications is rasterized on a system assuming total ordering of stems and/or no duplicate stems, the result will be as if some stems are missing rather than overt distortion of a glyph. And the need for such stems is relative
rare, so only a few glyphs in a typical font are likely to be affected.<br>
<br>
We can talk about versioning questions as part of the discussion.<br>
<br>
Skef<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
mpeg-otspec mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at" target="_blank">mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec" target="_blank">https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Helvetica",sans-serif;color:#26282A">_______________________________________________<br>
mpeg-otspec mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at" target="_blank">mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec" target="_blank">https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec</a></span><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal">_______________________________________________<br>
mpeg-otspec mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at" target="_blank">mpeg-otspec@lists.aau.at</a><br>
<a href="https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec" target="_blank">https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec</a><o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>