TidBITS#344/09-Sep-96
=====================

  The big news is our redesigned Web site, and Adam writes about the
  process, should you be thinking of doing the same. Adam also
  reviews Analog, a fast, free Web log analyzer. Updates to some
  Internet programs just appeared, including Internet Explorer 2.1
  and Cyberdog 1.1, and we have some advance information about
  System Update 7.5.4. Finally, we have two guest spots, one
  proposing a MacFriendly Web site and the other editorializing
  about Apple.

This issue of TidBITS sponsored in part by:
* APS Technologies -- 800/443-4199 -- <sales@apstech.com>
   Makers of hard drives, tape drives, and neat SCSI accessories.
   APS price lists: <http://www.apstech.com/aps-products.html>
* Northwest Nexus -- 800/539-3505 -- <http://www.nwnexus.com/>
   Professional Internet Services. <info@nwnexus.com>
* Power Computing -- 800/375-7693 -- <info@powercc.com>
   PowerTower Pro 225 MHz - the fastest desktop system ever.
   Win a PowerCenter 120! <http://www.powercc.com/>
* America Online -- 800/827-6364 -- <http://www.aol.com/>
   The world's largest provider of online services.
   Give Back to the Net -- <http://www.aol.com/give/>
* EarthLink Network -- 800/395-8425 -- <sales@earthlink.net>
   Providers of direct Internet access for Macintosh users.
   For eWorld refugees: no setup fee! <http://www.earthlink.net/>
* DealBITS: Cheap RAM, Power Macs, and software.
   <http://www.tidbits.com/dealbits/> -- <dealbits@tidbits.com>

Copyright 1990-1996 Adam & Tonya Engst. Details at end of issue.
   Information: <info@tidbits.com> Comments: <editors@tidbits.com>
   ---------------------------------------------------------------

Topics:
    MailBITS/09-Sep-96
    Ditch Digital, Go Analog
    MacFriendly Web Site: A Proposal
    Dream to be Different
    Rethinking a Web

<ftp://ftp.tidbits.com/pub/tidbits/issues/1996/TidBITS#344_09-Sep-96.etx>


MailBITS/09-Sep-96
------------------
  Responses to email might be slow for the next week or so. Geoff is
  taking some well-deserved time off, Tonya's battling article
  deadlines and a sore neck, and we have family coming to visit. In
  other words, real life once again intrudes on our little make-
  believe computer world, and it's good to come up for air and work
  on keeping things in perspective. [ACE]


**Mailing List Update** -- We recently added a Web form option for
  subscribing and unsubscribing from the TidBITS list, but since
  many people have trouble configuring their Web browser email
  preferences, those who use the form interface will receive an
  email confirmation, which must be replied to in order to confirm a
  subscription or signing off. In theory, this technique will ensure
  that subscribers use proper email addresses, thus reducing the
  hundreds of bounces we receive from sending out each week's issue.
  [ACE]

<http://www.tidbits.com/about/list.html>


**System 7.5.4 Update** -- According to a memo posted on Ric
  Ford's MacInTouch site, Apple will release System 7.5.4 Update
  later this week on all the standard Apple Web and FTP sites. The
  memo says the update primarily consists of performance and
  reliability enhancements, and will only install on Macs currently
  running System 7.5.3. Most interesting for owners of older Macs is
  the statement that "With the release of System 7.5.4 Update, Apple
  is delivering its final system software release for the Macintosh
  Plus, SE, Classic, Portable, PowerBook 100, SE FDHD, SE/30, LC,
  II, IIx, and IIcx. These computers were not designed to support
  32-bit memory addressing. Future Mac OS releases will require
  32-bit memory addressing, which is supported by all other
  Macintosh models." [ACE]

<http://www.macintouch.com/754announce.html>


**Microsoft Internet Explorer 2.1** -- Last week, Microsoft made
  Internet Explorer 2.1 available. The new release adds support for
  frames, including floating frames, and (in a welcome move) adds an
  option to turn off frames and plug-ins. Most of the other
  enhancements focus on the History and Favorites features, along
  with feedback and performance enhancements. Useful features in
  Netscape Navigator that Internet Explorer still lacks include
  zooming the page only to the size of the largest page element, and
  Netscape's URL guessing capability that allows users to enter
  "apple" and have the browser guess at "http://www.apple.com".
  Download sizes range from 1.7 MB to 2.3 MB, depending on the
  version. [ACE]

<http://www.microsoft.com/ie/download/>
<http://www.microsoft.com/ie/download/mac21.htm>


**Cyberdog 1.1** -- Apple has released Cyberdog 1.1, their set of
  OpenDoc-based integrated Internet tools. Cyberdog 1.1 requires the
  just-released OpenDoc 1.1. Changes and enhancements since Cyberdog
  1.0 include 68K (68030 or better) support, support for AppleTalk
  browsing and mounting of AppleTalk volumes, support for Netscape
  plug-ins, minimal scriptability (including support for the GetURL
  AppleEvent), and numerous other minor interface and functionality
  enhancements. In an ironic twist for the document-centric OpenDoc,
  Cyberdog 1.1 includes a Cyberdog application that opens your
  default notebook, allows all Cyberdog 1.1 documents to open in a
  single process, and accepts drag & drop of Cyberdog documents. The
  Cyberdog 1.1 download is 3.4 MB, and OpenDoc 1.1 is another 2.8
  MB. [ACE]

<http://cyberdog.apple.com/download/dodownload.html>
<http://cyberdog.apple.com/br/releasenotes.html>
<http://www.opendoc.apple.com/users/getod.html>


Ditch Digital, Go Analog
------------------------
  by Adam C. Engst <ace@tidbits.com>

  I've just found a neat little program that Macintosh webmasters
  might appreciate immensely. Written by Stephen Turner and called
  Analog, it's a free Web log analysis program. That's not unusual,
  but Analog stands out from others I've tried (WebStat and its
  newer cousin ServerStat Lite) by being blindingly fast. On a Power
  Mac 6150 that was running all my standard Internet servers, Analog
  processed a 17 MB log file in 2 minutes, 24 seconds.

<http://summary.net/soft/analog.html>
<http://www.statslab.cam.ac.uk/~sret1/analog/>

  For those who don't run a Web server or haven't bothered to
  analyze their logs, a Web log analysis program scans through your
  Web log and provides basic reports, including (at least for
  Analog) the following:

* Number of pages requested per month
* Number of pages requested each week
* Number of pages requested each day of the week
* Number of pages requested each hour of the day
* Number of pages requested by each top-level domain
* Number of times each directory was hit
* Number of times each file type was hit
* Number of times each file was hit
* List of "referrers" - the URLs of pages that contain links to
  your pages
* A count of how many hits came from different Web browsers

  You can see what Analog's HTML output looks like (including some
  nice graphical bar graphs) by checking out the statistics for May
  through August on our Web server at the URL below. We used WebStat
  for the statistics for April and before, so check out those
  earlier months if you want to compare the output formats.

<http://www.tidbits.com/about/stats.html>

  The utility of most of these reports should be evident, but I find
  some results especially interesting. For example, our Web site
  receives more hits on Tuesdays than any other day of the week.
  Since we publish on Monday night, that's not surprising, but it's
  good to know. Similarly, looking at the report of which hours of
  the day get the most hits, I can see that the low point is about
  2:00 AM, so that's when I have the server reboot itself each
  night. I like scanning through the list of files on the Web site
  along with the number of times they were hit, since it gives me an
  idea what people are doing when they come to the site. Since we'd
  been planning to rework our Web site (see "Rethinking a Web"
  below), seeing which pages are popular and which aren't is
  educational.

  August was the first month I turned on the REFERRER and AGENT
  options in WebSTAR's log, so I was intrigued to see what Analog
  would tell me. The REFERRER option logs the URL of the site from
  which someone has come to your site, and the AGENT option records
  the specific Web browser they're using. Unfortunately, the AGENT
  option isn't particularly reliable, because a number of Web
  browsers (Microsoft Internet Explorer in particular) identify
  themselves as Netscape Navigator to ensure that they're fed
  Netscape-compatible HTML from Web servers that can spit out
  different HTML to different browsers.

  It struck me as interesting that only a few thousand of the 85,000
  page requests on the TidBITS site in August came from external
  links. To an extent, that's understandable, because the site takes
  a lot of hits from people who use the home pages from Internet
  Starter Kit for Macintosh, Second Edition, and Internet Starter
  Kit for Windows, Second Edition (those books also account for the
  disproportionate number of requests from people using MacWeb and
  NetManage Chameleon WebSurfer for Windows). Even still, I wonder
  what percentage of hits on other sites come from external
  referrers versus the number that are typed in directly.

  Also interesting was the browser report, which told me that about
  60 percent of the pages are requested via some version of Netscape
  Navigator. MacWeb came in at 24 percent, and "Netscape
  (compatible)," which is probably mostly Microsoft Internet
  Explorer, came in third at 5 percent. The vast majority of the
  MacWeb hits come from the home page for Internet Starter Kit for
  Macintosh, Second Edition, so it seems that many people who bought
  that book haven't switched to new Web browsers, nor have they
  changed their home pages. Otherwise I wouldn't expect nearly as
  many hits from the now-moribund MacWeb. Despite Netscape
  Navigator's clear lead, I feel no inclination to use any Netscape
  extensions to HTML or other abominations like frames. It is nice
  to know that HTML 3.2 tags such as those for tables aren't much of
  a problem, though.

  When I ran Analog on my log file from August, I saw that all the
  references were internal to my site, so I set Analog to ignore all
  REFERRERs from my domain, thus restricting the list of REFERRERs
  to external sites. I tried, unsuccessfully, to better identify the
  different types of Web browsers as well, but I may have to spend
  some more time figuring out Analog's configuration files.

  Although Analog generally works fine with no additional
  configuration, you'll probably want to tweak some parts of its
  report, and that's the only place it falls down. Analog was ported
  to the Macintosh by Jason Linhart, and although it retains all the
  functionality and blazing speed of the original, it doesn't yet
  have a Macintosh interface. Functionally, that's not a problem,
  but it does make Analog more irritating to configure. I suspect
  you'll fiddle with the two main configuration text files for a
  while the first time, and - once you've made them work - you won't
  change them often. The only other problem I've had with Analog is
  that it likes a lot of memory if you feed it large log files. If
  it doesn't have enough RAM, it quits with an error 25, which is an
  out of memory error. Each time I run into that, I give it more RAM
  and try again and it's worked (the documentation notes this
  problem and suggests the solution).

  The Macintosh version of Analog supports the MacHTTP and WebSTAR
  format logs, so if you use a different Web server, Analog may not
  work on your logs. Analog is worth a look, if only for its sheer
  speed in these days when so many programs trade interface for
  performance. If Analog doesn't meet your needs, there are several
  other Macintosh utilities that analyze Web log files - check the
  page below for a list.

<http://arpp.carleton.ca/mac/tool/log.html>


MacFriendly Web Site: A Proposal
--------------------------------
  by John Faughnan <john@umnhcs.labmed.umn.edu>

  Macintosh software is losing its identity. Many new Macintosh
  programs are ported from a Windows foundation to simplify the
  creation of a cross-platform product. In many cases, these ports
  have little or no support for the unique features of the Mac OS.
  Software reviewers tend to ignore this problem because these Apple
  technologies aren't always obvious or because they aren't
  technically equipped to evaluate and appreciate some of the more
  hard-core features. When was the last time you saw Netscape
  Navigator's Apple event support mentioned in a review?

  Apple has long allowed software vendors to put stickers on
  "approved" software packages to indicate when that program
  supports certain Apple technologies. Stickers for QuickTime and
  PowerPC-native code abound now, and consumers properly identify
  them with support for important platform-specific features.
  However, Apple implements such policies in a haphazard fashion,
  and even if they did have stickers for some features, it's not
  hard to imagine a box cover overly festooned with brightly colored
  stickers proclaiming that product's support for a large number of
  Apple technologies.

  Happily, the Internet offers a better solution by providing a
  place where information can be readily shared. The Internet, and
  specifically, the Web, can enable informed consumer choice where
  stickers must perforce fail.

  I have a proposal. I'd like to see a reputable member of the
  Macintosh community host a Web site dedicated to informing
  consumers about software support for important features of the Mac
  OS. This could be called the "MacFriendly" site (no rights
  reserved!).

  The MacFriendly Web site could consist of a table (or more likely,
  a number of pages of tables), with the first column identifying
  the software product and the remaining columns noting the
  software's support of Macintosh specific features. This table
  wouldn't attempt to describe the software at all, though (for a
  fee) the software identifier could link to the vendor's site.

  What sorts of Macintosh specific features would belong at such a
  site? It's easy to come up with a partial list:

* Apple events (standard and suite specific)
* Apple Guide
* AppleScript Recordable
* Balloon Help (yes, Balloon Help is good - check out Eudora.)
* Drag & Drop
* Multiple monitor support (a key Macintosh-specific feature)
* Open Transport
* OpenDoc
* Publish and Subscribe
* QuickDraw 3D
* QuickDraw GX
* QuickTime
* QuickTime VR
* Stationery files
* WorldScript

  Of course, some of these features are utterly inappropriate for
  certain programs - a simple drag & drop utility like Chad
  Magendanz's ShrinkWrap doesn't need to support Open Transport
  since it's not a networking application. A "Not Applicable"
  graphic or tag would solve that problem in the tables.

  The MacFriendly Web site could also track other application
  features or problems commonly exhibited by programs ported from
  other platforms to give a partial measure of how "Mac-savvy" a
  program is. Consumers might be interested in items along these
  lines, including some of the following:

* Ability to run on MAE (Macintosh Application Environment) under
  Unix
* Don't use System Folder to store files
* Fat binary, PowerPC, or 68K code
* Installation record (to aid uninstallation) or uninstallation
  options
* No "path dependencies" (use the Alias Manager)
* "Smart" installers that allow installation onto non-boot volumes
* Support for Internet Config

  The trick would be to have software companies submit their
  MacFriendliness information through a secure route. Companies that
  fail to submit information might be listed with question marks
  under each heading; consumers could guess that these were not
  MacFriendly applications. If a software company lied about what
  their software supported, they'd simply be removed from the site.
  From a technical standpoint, setting up such a database-based Web
  site is easy.

  The hardest part of creating a MacFriendly Web site would be
  working with software companies, since it can be extremely
  difficult to extract information from many companies. It's
  unlikely that most companies would enter and maintain their own
  information with any sort of accuracy or regularity, if they got
  to it at all.

  One alternative would be to turn the site into a money-making
  venture so it could afford to pay someone to coax the information
  out of software companies. A listing might be free, but having a
  link back to the software company's site would cost money, and Web
  advertising could probably be worked in as well.

  Another, more attractive alternative would be for Apple to run
  this site themselves. They already have a database of third party
  products so it would be less work to get it started than for
  someone else.

<http://www.devworld.apple.com/mkt/thirdparty.html>

  Either way, a MacFriendly Web site would be a great addition to
  the Macintosh Internet resources currently available. I reserve no
  rights to this idea; I only hope someone will build it. I know I'd
  be a regular visitor!


Dream to be Different
---------------------
  by John Martellaro <marty104@usit.net>

  Voltaire said that if there were no God, man would have to invent
  Him. In a lesser but just as strong and pervasive sense, if there
  were no Apple Computer, mankind would have to invent it, for we
  are dreamers, and dreamers look up to the sky, always searching,
  thinking of what could be.

  In contrast, most analysts look down into the murky swells of the
  business world when they analyze Apple. Sam Whitmore wrote a calm
  and accurate accounting of Apple's problems in PC Week (22-Jul-
  96). An Apple fan couldn't complain about his thesis, for it was
  even-tempered and to the (business) point. But the article, as
  with all the articles that suppose to articulate Apple's demise,
  overlooked something very important. Sam forgot that there are
  those who have never been afraid to be different or be outcasts.
  The dreamers, the writers, the artists, the scientists - all those
  people who look to the future and say "why not?" - walk to the
  beat of a different drummer.

  Now, with the further delay of Mac OS 8, one of the most
  challenging tasks Apple has undertaken, it will be all too
  tempting, even for the Macintosh supporters, to start casting the
  stones of fear, uncertainty, and doubt.

  Do we ask more courage from Apple than we ask from ourselves?

  Once upon a time, a man named Steve Jobs, filled with passion and
  fire, depicted PC users as zombies, walking stoically off the
  cliff of mediocrity. No one liked being compared to a mindless
  automaton, and indeed, Microsoft has made a good living by giving
  business people what they have dearly wanted most for the last ten
  years: respectability. The line that Windows 95 is "just as good
  as a Mac" is the anthem of those who, for years, never had the
  vision or courage to embrace something better. Microsoft's
  strength is also its weakness.

  There will always be those who are sparked by the glimmer of
  something just a little better, just a little cooler, just a
  little more inspiring. And there will always be Dilbert-esque
  managers who must exert their control by ignoring the advice of
  their technical people. Here's an example from a Computer Weekly
  article from 1991, titled: "Reaction to 50 MHz 486 is lukewarm."
  It quotes a woman from Hughes Aircraft as saying, "many of our
  users have more power than they need right now [with 80386-based
  PCs]" A manager at Chevron concurs, noting, "Right now we could
  justify the price only as a server." To be fair, these people were
  using DOS, not a graphically-based system that demanded
  considerable horsepower. (And the Macintosh IIfx delivered just
  that at that time.) So where were these people looking? They were
  staring hard at their budgets.

  Where are Macintosh users looking? Men like Douglas Adams and
  Arthur C. Clarke look to the stars. The spirit of Apple Computer
  is that of excellence and adventure. It embraces the future and
  everything positive that the minds of men can conceive of. We've
  often paid a little more, but we paid the money out of our own
  pockets. Some of us make a living by day with Windows so we can
  spend our own money on something that captures our imagination in
  the evening.

  Apple lost its way in recent years. Apple forgot about inspiration
  and wonder. It got caught in price wars, desperately seeking
  acceptance at any price. Now, Apple's destiny is to be the best.
  Truly, there may only be ten percent of the population that cares
  about the best. But if Apple gives up that ten percent, there are
  other dreamers and entrepreneurs standing quietly in the wings
  waiting to take up the cause. We cannot predict what they will do,
  but the spirit of the dreamers who want something more will always
  be with us. More than anything, we want Apple to know that.


Rethinking a Web
----------------
  by Adam C. Engst <ace@tidbits.com>

  I just put our new Web site online this Sunday, and since it was
  the product of quite a lot of thought and a few hours of HTML
  coding, I thought I'd pass on some of the things we considered and
  learned in the process.

<http://www.tidbits.com/>

  Our previous Web site evolved, as many early sites did,
  organically. We had launched MacHTTP and needed a default page, so
  we put one together on the spot. As time went by, we thought of
  additional pages we needed, so we created them and linked them in,
  often right from the home page. All of this was well before HTML
  3.0, much less the current HTML 3.2, so there wasn't much we could
  to jazz it up visually while retaining the structured nature of
  good HTML (and avoiding Shockwave, JavaScript, loopy animated
  GIFs, background music, and 3-D Surround Smell). In addition,
  design that seemed reasonable two years ago now seems as stale as
  a month-old bagel and not much more edible.

  So, this summer when we were driving to Ithaca, New York for our
  friend Oliver's wedding after Macworld Boston, Tonya and I went
  over the site in our minds, jotting down notes about what pages we
  had versus those we wanted, what we wanted our site to do versus
  what it did then, and so on.

  That sort of a brainstorming session is a necessity in any good
  Web site redesign. Think carefully about what message you're
  trying to convey, and what visitors to your site both expect and
  will want to do. In the case of TidBITS, it seems quite clear that
  we publish a weekly electronic newsletter, so if someone visits
  our Web site, they're probably interested in finding out what's in
  latest issue. In the past, that required at least several
  navigational clicks, so we placed a copy of the issue blurb and
  table of contents right smack on the home page. Along with those
  two items, we created a simple Web form to make it easier for
  people to subscribe to the TidBITS mailing list and a line of
  links to provide quick access to the translations of TidBITS into
  a variety of languages. Again, those two items seemed to answer
  the question of "What would I want to see when I visit the TidBITS
  Web site?"

  Those then are the primary elements of our home page, along with a
  TidBITS graphic and a plug for my book. However, since visitors'
  questions don't stop at "What's in this week's issue of TidBITS?"
  and "How do I subscribe?", we try to address other common
  questions as a textual navigation bar at the top of the home page.
  The navigation bar, which is repeated on all other pages, contains
  two lines. The first provides a direct link to the home page and a
  link to a page of links about TidBITS; the second line contains
  links to past issues, to a search engine for searching back
  issues, and to the page listing our many translations.

  In the past, we had links to many of the less-important pages
  right on the home page, which provided too many choices to
  visitors and was a rather haphazard organization. The About
  TidBITS page one level down from the home page now takes over
  those duties, offering a centralized collection of information
  about TidBITS. If you're wondering about who works on TidBITS, how
  it earns money, where it's posted, or how to contact us, the
  answer should be an obvious link from the About TidBITS page.

  On a number of pages, including About TidBITS, the page listing
  our translations, and the page listing the places you can find
  TidBITS, I adopted a "text block button" design that I feel works
  quite well. The goal was to avoid the confusion of graphical
  buttons, which are easily misinterpreted, especially by people
  from other cultures, and the overhead of creating and transferring
  additional graphics. Where possible, we stick with text (being
  writers, not graphic designers), so the combination of an
  unordered list inside a two-column table gives the visual
  impression of a button object with the clarity of a brief textual
  description (which carefully avoids saying "Click here..."). And,
  of course, the text block button design repeats where appropriate,
  unifying the list pages on the site.

  Another unifying element I worked on for quite a while is the
  textual navigation bar. On the home page (and on the page that
  will provide access to TidBITS issues in the near future - it has
  to be merged with Geoff's distribution automation), the navigation
  bar is on the top of the page because we felt that placing it on
  the bottom tended to hide it and make it more difficult to get
  into the site. It's entirely likely that someone will want to find
  out where to get TidBITS on America Online, for instance, but will
  only know the URL to our home page. Placing the About TidBITS link
  at the top of the home page makes navigation easier. For all the
  rest of the pages, we felt that the user would have to read the
  entire page to know what was there anyway, so placing the
  navigation bar on the bottom of the page was more appropriate (and
  better graphically).

  Many Web sites suffer from a lack of repeat visitors, and although
  I haven't tried to analyze our Web logs to that extent, I suspect
  that our previous site had that problem. An excellent method of
  ensuring that people return is to have content that changes at
  regular intervals. Since we have a new issue of TidBITS each week,
  placing the blurb and table of contents on the home page not only
  provides what many visitors undoubtedly want, but also gives us
  the opportunity to change the home page on a weekly basis, thus
  encouraging people to visit regularly.

  I'm sure that with all that Tonya has written about HTML authoring
  tools, WYSIWYG and not, that at least some of you are curious
  about what we used. The fact is that Tonya's been extremely busy
  writing a magazine article about that very topic, so I went ahead
  and did all the work myself. I'm comfortable with HTML, but I
  haven't done all that many pages in the past. Even still, since I
  had a good idea of what I wanted our pages to look like (white
  background, banner graphic, text block buttons, textual navigation
  bar), I decided that it would be easiest for me to work in a
  familiar environment, which for me means Nisus Writer with its
  HTML macros. It might not be the latest and greatest, but it does
  the job and I was able to use the Find/Replace across all open
  files whenever I discovered that I'd screwed up the relative URL
  to some page in the ubiquitous navigation bar. I would have
  appreciated an internal link checker, since I moved a lot of the
  pages from the root level into a sub-folder during the redesign,
  and that screwed up a lot of links. Still, I never quite found
  time to install Adobe SiteMill, and if I've made a mistake or two,
  I'm sure we'll hear about them and fix them soon enough.

  So take a look and see what you think. Let me know if you have
  some expectation of the information contained on the site that's
  not met, if it fails to answer a question you may have. The answer
  may simply be the kind of thing we don't publicize, or it may have
  slipped our minds when redesigning the site, at which point I'll
  try to add it in. We do have additional work left to do, including
  the constantly updated page listing all the TidBITS issues and
  perhaps some new graphics, but the bulk of the changes are here
  until they too start to harden like an aging bagel.


$$

 Non-profit, non-commercial publications may reprint articles if
 full credit is given. Others please contact us. We don't guarantee
 accuracy of articles. Caveat lector. Publication, product, and
 company names may be registered trademarks of their companies.

 This file is formatted as setext. For more information send email
 to <setext@tidbits.com>. A file will be returned shortly.

 For information on TidBITS: how to subscribe, where to find back
 issues, and other useful stuff, send email to: <info@tidbits.com>
 Send comments and editorial submissions to: <editors@tidbits.com>
 Issues available at: ftp://ftp.tidbits.com/pub/tidbits/issues/
 And: http://www.tidbits.com/tb-issues/
 To search back issues with WAIS, use this URL via a Web browser:
 http://wais.sensei.com.au/macarc/tidbits/searchtidbits.html
 -------------------------------------------------------------------



