Home
Gary Edwards's Library tagged → View Popular
Compatibility matters: The Lessons of Massachusetts
Gary Edwards's List: Compatibility matters - The lessons of Massachusetts are many. Application level "compatibility" with existing MSOffice desktops and workgroups is vital. Format level "compatibility" with the legacy of billions of binary documents is vital. And "ecosystem" compatibility with the MSOffice productivity environment.
What Oracle Sees in Sun Microsystems | NewsFactor Network
Good article from Aaron Ricadela. The focus is on Java, Sun's hardware-Server business, and Oracle's business objectives. No mention of OpenOffice or ODf though. There is however an interesting quote from IBM regarding the battle between Java and Microsoft .NET. Also, no mention of a OpenOffice-Java Foundation that would truly open source these technologies.
<br><br>
When we were involved with the Massachusetts Pilot Study and ODF Plug-in proposals, IBM and Oracle lead the effort to open source the da Vinci plug-in. They put together a group of vendors known as "the benefactors", with the objective of completing work on da Vinci while forming a patent pool - open source foundation for all OpenOffice and da Vinci source. This idea was based on the Eclipse model.<br><br>
One of the more interesting ideas coming out of the IBM-Oracle led "benefactors", was the idea of breaking OpenOffice into components that could then be re-purposed by the Eclipse community of developers. The da Vinci plug-in was to be the integration bridge between Eclipse and the Microsoft Office productivity environment. Very cool. And no doubt IBM and Oracle were in synch on this in 2006. The problem was that they couldn't convince Sun to go along with the plan.
<br><br>
Sun of course owned both Java and OpenOffice, and thought they could build a better ODF plug-in for OpenOffice (and own that too). A year later, Sun actually did produce an ODF plug-in for MSOffice. It was sent to Massachusetts on July 3rd, 2007, and tested against the same set of 150 critical documents da Vinci had to successfully convert without breaking. The next day, July 4th, Massachusetts announced their decision that they would approve the use of both ODF and OOXML! The much hoped for exclusive ODF requirement failed in Massachusetts exactly because Sun insisted on their way or the highway. <br><br>
Let's hope Oracle can right the ship and get OpenOffice-ODF-Java back on track.
<br><br>
<i>"......To gain Sun's software assets, Oracle also has to take
-
Citigroup's Thill estimates Oracle could cut between 40 percent and 70 percent of Sun's roughly 33,000 employees. Excluding restructuring costs, Oracle expects Sun to add $1.5 billion in profit during the first year after the acquisition closes this summer, and another $2 billion the following year. Oracle executives declined to say how many jobs would be eliminated.
-
Citigroup's Thill estimates Oracle could cut between 40 percent and 70 percent of Sun's roughly 33,000 employees. Excluding restructuring costs, Oracle expects Sun to add $1.5 billion in profit during the first year after the acquisition closes this summer, and another $2 billion the following year. Oracle executives declined to say how many jobs would be eliminated.
Google Apps no threat to Microsoft? Maybe it is... | TalkBack on ZDNet
Replace or Re-Purpose? The Belgian Desktop Pilot Study
Here is the summary of the Belgian desktop pilot study.
The conclusion echoed the findings of Massachusetts and California; they found that they could not use OpenOffice as a replacement for MSOffice. Although there were many reasons sighted, i think they all fit under the larger framework that MSOffice is the center of what turned out to be a sprawling desktop productivity ecosystem.
ConsortiumInfo.org - ODF vs. OOXML: War of the Words Chapter 5
-
The First Law of the Interent is that of interoperability. Interop ALWAYS comes first.
Interop trumps innovation!!!
This is why the Interent changes everything. Innovation takes place within the bounds of ineroperabiltiy. Vendors of course rely on innovation as the primary means of market differentiation. They would of course champion innovative features. Interop on the other hand is a leveling force.
- garyedwards on 2008-01-05 - http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/trackback.php?id=20080104062428565 - garyedwards on 2008-01-05
-
Add Sticky NoteUnlike screw threads, which are easily implemented with complete fidelity, it is sometimes only feasible to create a standard for software that, in a given case, at best will enable two products to become close to interoperable. After that, tinkering and testing is necessary to accomplish the final "fit." Similarly, the costs to innovation in achieving true "plug and play" interoperability when that result is feasible may be unacceptably high, leading to a decision to create a standard that (like ODF) only locks in a very significant amount of functionality, rather than complete uniformity (as OOXML strives to achieve).
This is an odd way of stating the interop problem between ODF and the billions of legacy MSOffice documents? "The costs to innovation in achieving true plug and play interoperability (high fidelity conversion?) when that result is feasible may be unacceptably high......"
OOXML was designed for the high fidelity conversion of those billions of legacy MSOffice documents. ODF was not.
What's interesting here is that Andy is correctly pointing out that the ODF vednors refuse to compromise on the innovative ways OpenOffice differs from MSOffice. The innovations involve the different ways OpenOffice implements basic docuemnt structures such as lists, sections, fields, tables and page dynamics. MSOffic euses an older method of implementation.
When converting legacy MSOffice documents to ODF, the fidelity breaks down wherever these strucutral features are present. The key point here is that these strucutral differentials are exactly related to how OpenOffice and MSOffice differ in their implementation methods. It's an application difference beign expressed at the file format level!!!!!!!!!!!
The ODF vendors refuse to compromise with their application level innovations. The result of this is that billions of MSOffice docuemnts cannot be converted to ODF without significant loss of information.
Which is to say: both ODF and OOXML are application specific formats. Worse, neither ODF or OOXML specify the syntax and semantics of layout!!! They only specify the syntax. Developers must study OpenOffice and MSDOffice to figure out how presentation (layout) is achieved.
This stands in stark contrast to the W3C's Compound Document Format (CDF). CDF provides a very generic, application independent separation of content (XHTML) and presentation (CSS), where the presentation layer is entirely specified. CSS is highly portable because it is completely specified and totally application independent.
- on 2008-01-05
Ripped Off by Rob Weir - Again
-
Intriguing? Rob Weir knows full well that the Foundation proposed this exact same feature set as part of the da Vinci Plug-in design for Massachusetts, July of 2006!!!!!!!!!
The Complete Feature list of the da Vinci plug-in for MSOffice that was proposed and signed off on by CIO Louis Gutierrez in early August of 2006 was well known by IBM's representatives who were working hand in hand with us at the time: Rob Weir, Don Harbison and Doug Heintzman.
Louis Gutierrez had asked IBM and Oracle to create a "benefactors Group" to overcome the challenge that Massachusetts ITD did not have a budget. IBM and Oracle selected Google, Sun, Novell, Intel, and Nokia as key benefactors. The group was provided with the complete feature set and roadmap for da Vinci development.
The da Vinci roadmap was the schedule announced by Louis Gutierrez in his mid year report, August 17th, 2006.
The da Vinci plug-in feature set, in order of priority, consisted of:- ODF iX Approval at OASIS
- Plug-in for MS WORD
- Accessibility Interface for all ODF documents in MS Word
- PDF - ODF iX Digital Signature container
- Plug-in for MS Excel
- Interoperability Wizard for OpenOffice
- Plug-in for PowerPoint
- XForms Interface
The least Rob could do is credit the Foundation with what was then a very creative and innovative solution. Instead, a year later he's trash talking us and posturing as if he thought of this approach!
~ge~
- garyedwards on 2007-11-22
-
An intriguing idea is whether we can have it both ways. Suppose you are in an ODF editor and you have a "Save for archiving..." option that would save your ODF document as normal, but also generate a PDF version of it and store it in the zip archive along with ODF's XML streams. Then digitally sign the archive along with a time stamp to make it tamper-proof. You would need to define some additional access conventions, but you could end up with a single document that could be loaded in an ODF editor (in read-only mode) to allow examination of the details of spreadsheet formulas, etc., as well as loaded in a PDF reader to show exactly how it was formated.
Quible Correction -- garyedwards@...'s comment on "Microsoft: We were railroaded in Massachusetts on ODF" | TalkBack on ZDNet
-
This is part of a series of talkback responses i had made to a ZDNet article, "Microsoft: We were railroaded in Massachusetts on ODF". Andy Updegrove participated in this exchange.
My comment was picked up by the Heise in a FSF Free Software Foundation Europe article, "The Converter Hoax".
~ge~
- garyedwards on 2007-07-16
-
Microsoft was invited, and did join the OASIS
Open Office XML File Format TC as a founding
member with observer status. Although the name
of the TC was changed in September of 2004 (at
the request of the EU) to "OpenDocument",
Microsoft remains a member with observer status.
All that need be done to convert their status
from observer to voting member is to notify the
TC Chairman of your intentions, show up for two
consecutive phone conferences, and you are a
voting member. It's that simple.
EU-IDABC ODEF Workshop 2007 in Berlin - Documentation - presentations
-
ODF officially died on February 28, 2007, at the Advanced eGovernment Conference in Berlin. Hellow ODEF
- garyedwards on 2007-06-05
-
IDABC ODEF Workshop 2007 in Berlin
-
- compile further input from Member State public administrations on their experiences and strategies on ODEF
- gather industry viewpoints on the initiatives relating to ODEF standardization and information on future standardisation developments
- provide a platform for exchange between stakeholders in public administrations and main industry players
ODEF Strategies: Examples from European Administration
Practical Experiences with the implementation of ODEF
Report on ODEF-Standardisation activities
4 parallel sessions with participants
A panel discussion with stakeholders
As information exchange in and with public administrations is very often bound to documents, editing, archiving and exchange possibilities for documents are crucial for the optimum function of administrations, both in terms of practicality and cost.Initiatives such as the PEGSCO Recommendations on Open Document Formats published by the IDABC Management Committee, demonstrate public administrations preference for "open" document exchange and storage formats that are subject to formal standardisation via international standardisation procedures.The primary objectives of the Berlin event, held at the German Federal Ministry of the Interior (BMI), were to:
The Microsoft Document Juggernaut: ECMA to Begin Drafting XPS as Alternative Standard to PDF
-
More on Andy UpDegrove's "Game Over for open standards" comment.
- garyedwards on 2007-06-30
-
"Be that as it may," Updegrove continues, "perpetuating one monopolistic market position after another seems wholly incompatible with the role of a global standards body, tasked with protecting the interests of all stakeholders. If OOXML, and now Microsoft XML Paper Specification, each sail through ECMA and are then adopted by ISO/IEC JTC1, then it may be time to wonder whether the time has come to declare 'game over' for open standards."
Game Over! Latest Draft of Mass. ETRM Includes OOXML
-
Game Over? Probably. I've been expecting Massachusetts to publicly revise the ODF mandate to include OOXML ever since Louis Gutierrez resigned in early October of 2006. That was as clear a signal that ODF had failed in Massachusetts as anyone needed.
The only surprise is that it took the new CIO, Beth Pepoli so long to make the announcement that OOXML would be recognized as an officially recognized open XML file format going forward.
Andy UpDegrove of course does his best to downplay the significance of this announcement. But how can this not be the deathnell for ODF?
The failure of ODF in Massachusetts has resulted in a world wide recognition that it is impossible to implement ODF.
This is exactly what happened to ODF mandate legislature in California. The CIO's in California uniformly rejected both ODF legislation and Sun's hapless effort to set up an ODF Pilot Study based on what had happened in Massachusetts. If Mass couldn't implement ODF, than they saw no reason for them to try.
And it does come down to "implementation".
Most people think the implementation of ODF is as easy as downloading OepnOffice and converting your legacy docuemnts to ODF as they are used. Simply fix the artifacts of conversion in process, and never look back. OOo is free. So what's not to like?
Well, the problem is that the world has fifteen plus years of building business processes, line of business integrated applications and other client/server integration on top of the MSOffice application suite. These business processes are bound hard to MSOffice.
So the barrier for OpenOffice and ODF is twofold. Any implementation of ODF must overcome both the binary documents conversion barrier, and, the MSOffice bound business process barrier.
The cost and disruption of a rip out and replace migration to ODF is impossibly high! Yet that's the only solution ODF vendors offer governments.
Is there a way around this impossibly high dual barrier? Yes, but it involves the use of internal ODF plugins for MSOffice.
This should not come as a surprise because the internal plugin route is exactly how Microsoft migrates existing docuemnts and business processes to their XML. The internal ODF plugins are simply clones of the Microsoft OOXML plugin, installed through the MS XML Compatibiltiy Kit.
Massachusetts came to this conclussion after conducting a year long ODF Pilot Study. Before the Study was even complete, Massachusetts IT realized the impossibility of the dual barriers. They issued an unprecedented Request for Information concerning the possibility of a ODF plugin for MSOffice. One that would be able to "internally" convert documents so transparently and with such high fidelity that there woudl be NO DISRUPTION to existign business processes.
Which means that the ODF internal plugins for MSOffice had to match the performance of the Microsoft internal OOXML plugins!
Incredibly, this can actually be done. Where ODF failed in Massachusetts is not with the internal ODF plugins, but with the support of ODF vendors for da Vinci, which was the only internal plugin willing to go the ODF Communtiy route Louis Gutierrez desired.
So now we have the Massachusetts and Denmark both recognizing OOXML and ODF as open XML file formats. More will follow. The problem with this "recognition" is that the Microsoft OOXML plugin is the only cost effective (free) and NON DISRUPTIVE way for existing MSOffice bound workgroups and workflows to move to XML.
The truth is, ODF vendors and communities left governemnts with no other choice but to go with OOXML as the only way to migrate existing systems to XML.
Sad, isn't it?
~ge~
- garyedwards on 2007-07-02
-
this new draft includes Microsoft's OOXML formats as an acceptable "open format."
GullFOSS: It's our way or the highway. So what if new cool features = Zero Interop? Download OOo and get over it already!
-
The chuckleheads at Sun's StarOffice/OpenOffice Hamburg office respond to Florian's comprehensive lis tof suggestions to greatly improve ODF interoperability.
- garyedwards on 2007-06-05 -
Make no mistake about it. Microsoft is absolutely right about three things:
.... Compatibility with existing file formats is not an ODF concern.
.... Sun controls the OASIS ODF TC.
.... Sun makes certain that ODF is bound tightly to the OpenOffice feature set.
Sun's view of interoperability is that of a one way street. Documents can be converted into ODF-OOo/SO, but they are guaranteed to break during any kind of document routing or round tripping.
This is also the reason why the Sun "external" plugin for MSOffice fails. One way conversion simply isn't enough to crack the hold MSOffice has on critical day to day business processes. The only way to that is with a conversion process able to maintain high level fidelity while round tripping.
As the EU IDABC has figured out, the ODF-OOo/SO specification is loaded with interoperability break points. That's why they are turning to ODEF, which can be seen as a version of ODF that is truly application independent and optimized for interoperability.
~ge~ - garyedwards on 2007-06-10
-
When such new features that enhance the interoperability require enhancements to the Open Document file format we will propose the necessary changes to the OASIS Open Document TC. This way not only OpenOffice.org but also Open Document benefits from our efforts. Florian Reuter, who now works for Novell, lists some of the changes we have in mind in his blog . So there are a lot of common ideas how we can improve the interoperability between OpenOffice.org and Microsoft Word documents and I hope we can work together with Florian here.
ODF1.2 Interoperability Proposal
-
Part of the sad but enduring "History of Failed ODF Interoperability Attempts". This particular message is dated November 20th, 2006.
The OpenDocument Foundation was notified a week earlier that the "benefactor" ODF Community group Louis Gutierrez had asked IBM and Oracle to put together in Massachusetts had failed. This was the group Louis formed around the da Vinci plugin and our InfoSet APi.
Florian has been hired by Novell, and his first day on the job he finds out about the IBM - Novell deal with Microsoft. Now he has write the MOOXML plugin for OpenOffice using the MS-CleverAge Translator Project work. So he writes this message to the ODF TC [office] list.
The interoperability enhancements Florian suggests are based on the <interoperability eXtensions> submitted in August to the ODF Metadata SC for consideration.
The first element in this list tha tFlorian chose to tackle related to "Lists". He called it the "LIst Override Proposal". This became the now infamous "List Enhancement Proposal War" that resulted in Sun having OASIS boot out the Foundation.
Such is life in big vendor ODF'dom
~ge~
- garyedwards on 2007-06-04
-
- From: "Florian Reuter" <freuter@novell.com>
- To: <office@lists.oasis-open.org>
- Date: Mon, 20 Nov 2006 17:03:24 +0100
Subject: Suggested ODF1.2 items
<!--X-Subject-Header-End-->
<!--X-Head-of-Message-->
<!--X-Head-of-Message-End-->
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-Begin-->
<!--X-Head-Body-Sep-End-->
<!--X-Body-of-Message-->Suggested enhancement for OpenDocument V1.2
State's move to open document formats still not a mass migration
-
Eric Lai keesp pokign at that Massachusetts hornets nest. One of these days he's going to crack it open, and it will be back to square one for the ODF Community. Still missing from his research is the infoamous 300 page pilot study and accompanying web site where comments and professional observations document a year long study concernign the difficulties of implementing ODF solutions and making the migration. <br><br>
The study was focused on OpenOffice, StarOffice, Novell Office, and a IBM WorkPlace prototype.<br><br>
The results of the year long pilot have never seen the public light of day. But ComputerWorld is one of the media orgs that successfully filed a court action to invoke the freedom of information act in Massachusetts. How come they can't find the Pilot Study?<br><br>
At the end of the pilot study period, Massachusetts issued their infamous RFi; the request for information regarding the possiblity of a ODF plugin for MSOffice! Meaning, the Pilot Study did not go well for the heroes of ODF - OpenOffice, StarOffice, Novell Office and WorkPlace. Instead, Massachusetts sought an ODF plugin that would no doubt extend the life of MSOffice for years to come. No rip out and replace here folks!<br><br>
~ge~
- garyedwards on 2007-06-09
-
Add Sticky NoteOnly a tiny fraction of the PCs at Massachusetts government agencies are able to use the Open Document Format (ODF) for Office Applications, despite an initial deadline of this month for making sure that all state agencies could handle the file format.
- Hey, nice comments! - on 2007-06-09
Evermore Integrated Office
-
Homepage for EIOffice, a complete JAVA clone of MSOffice. This stuff is excellent! Easily surpasses OpenOffice in terms of file format conversion and compatibilitiy. EIOffice is fully capable of "round tripping" documents with MSOffice users without compromising fideltiy. Supports UOF but not ODF or MOOXML
- garyedwards on 2007-04-27
-
EIOffice includes the features found in Microsoft Office, plus a number of productivity features found nowhere else.
Slashdot | Pro-ODF Legislation Loses In Six States
-
Incredible. The tile alone says it all. And the poster commenting on IBM and secret disaster that happened in Massachusetts has it right. I wonder who that commenter is anyway?
- garyedwards on 2007-06-04
-
If this is the case then it greatly increases the scope of the bill from being a simple switch from MS Office to OpenOffice to a massive effort involving the definition of many new XML schemata, developing, testing and debugging software to handle the new schemata, creation of documentation, deployment of and training for the new software, etc., etc.
-
Another document format is not needed. This was already obvious before blogs took off, but to be promoting now is unforgivably stupid and irresponsible. Try and explain to an average person why all the typing they just did cannot even be viewed in a Web browser, they will not get it. Saving the user's typing as DOC or ODF is a con. The storage of text, styled text, graphics, photos, even movies (MPEG-4 H.264-AAC) has been solved. Your document format is ready it is HTML 4.01 Strict, CSS 2.1, and JS 1.5, there is nothing in the 1980's technology of MS Word that cannot be stored this way.
Microsoft trounces pro-ODF forces in state battles over open document formats
-
Uh Oh. They got IBM dead to rights in Massachusetts. I guess the truth about Massachusetts will be told! Finally. ODF failed in Massachusetts because there isn't a reasonable means of implementing ODF. Same in California.
- garyedwards on 2007-06-04 -
A must read. And yes, the ODF Vendors are the reason ODF lost. They didn't provide useful solutions. In fact, the applicaitons they proposed were seen by government CIO's as cstly and disruptive "rip out and replace" non starters. In California, CIO's asked if it was even possible to implement ODF!!!
- garyedwards on 2007-06-06
-
Microsoft trounces pro-ODF forces in state battles over open document formats
Eric Lai and Gregg Keizer
<!-- begin 336x280 ad tag -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript">
document.write('');
if (document.getElementById('dclk999')) {
document.getElementById('dclk999').src = 'http://ad.doubleclick.net/adi/idg.us.cpw.desktopapplications/index;pos=imu;tile=3;sz=336x280;ord=' + ord + '?';
}
</script>
<!-- End ad tag -->
<!-- begin ad tag (tile=4) -->
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript">
document.write('<script src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/idg.us.cpw.desktopapplications/index;pos=ezblaster;tile=4;sz=336x35;ord=' + ord + '?" language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript"><\/script>');
</script><script src="http://ad.doubleclick.net/adj/idg.us.cpw.desktopapplications/index;pos=ezblaster;tile=4;sz=336x35;ord=7866891896592123?" language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript"></script>
<script language="JavaScript" type="text/javascript">if ((!document.images && navigator.userAgent.indexOf('Mozilla/2.') >= 0)|| navigator.userAgent.indexOf("WebTV") >= 0) {document.write('<\/a>');}</script>
<!-- End ad tag -->
<!-- END AD IMU -->
June 03, 2007
(Computerworld) -
Keeping it private
The other problem, Mathers said, was the jargon-laden disinformation that committee members felt they were being fed by lobbyists for both IBM and Microsoft. Although lobbyists would tell the committee one thing in private, they got cold feet when asked to verify the information publicly, under oath. "Suddenly, nobody wanted to sign witness affirmation forms and testify," he said.
That undermined the credibility of each side, but it particularly damaged the position of ODF proponents. After Wyne testified publicly that in Massachusetts, only a handful of computers had thus far been converted over to using ODF, IBM declined to dispute her claims, Mathers said -- despite having earlier given "gleaming" reports on the progress of ODF in Massachusetts. "That's when I really started to question the whole bill," he said.
Mass. Set to Mix Office With ODF
-
The August 28th, 2006 article about Massachusetts decision to use addon plugins. ComputerWorld - Caarol Sliwa
- garyedwards on 2007-06-05
-
Massachusetts last week officially confirmed that its executive agencies for now will continue using Microsoft Office instead of switching to alternative desktop applications. But by Jan. 1, in keeping with a controversial policy announced last year, the state plans to start adding plug-in software that will let its Office users create and save files in the industry-standard OpenDocument format.
» OpenDocument or OpenXML: Do you care? | Between the Lines | ZDNet.com
-
Excellent coverage of a very important interview!
- garyedwards on 2007-06-07
-
A week or so ago, I published a podcast at IT Conversation with Scott Mace interviewing Gary Edwards about OpenDocument. Edwards is the president of the OpenDocument Foundation. OpenDocument Foundation is a non-profit that works to promote the OpenDocument file format–an XML file format for office documents.
There’s no question that businesses want an XML-based file format for office data. The question, naturally, is which XML-based file format. Microsoft has it’s own XML-based file format called OpenXML.
State's move to open document formats still not a mass migration
-
Use of ODF remains minimal on government PCs in Massachusetts
Eric Lai ....... June 8, 2007
Bummer! Do you think IBM is silent on this because they are busy cutting sweetheart deals with MS? Are they going to hang Sun on this? I'm sure that by next week IBM will have to respond to ODEF. This just keeps getting better. So in both Texas and California they wonder if it's even possible to implement ODF solutions. No one wants to get into that hole with Massachusetts.
~ge~
- garyedwards on 2007-06-08
-
June 08, 2007 (Computerworld) -- Only a tiny fraction of the PCs at Massachusetts government agencies are able to use the Open Document Format (ODF) for Office Applications, despite an initial deadline of this month for making sure that all state agencies could handle the file format.
IBM undeterred by setbacks to ODF adoption | InfoWorld | News | 2007-06-08 | By China Martens, IDG News Service
-
Thus spoke the little Dutch Boy, his finger in the dike, his confidence large. Meanwhile, people with half a brain were heading for the high ground. California, Texas, Massachusetts and the EU IDABC come to mind. Hello bob! Can you say ODEF?
- garyedwards on 2007-06-08
-
You might think the steady defeat of bills in several U.S. states to mandate the use of free interoperable file formats might
dampen the spirits of IBM, one of the prime supporters of ODF (OpenDocument Format). Far from it, said IBM's Bob Sutor, who
sees the recent news as par for the course in the evolution of any open standard.
Selected Tags
Related Tags
Sponsored Links
Top Contributors
Groups interested in massachu...
-
Colonies
Roanoke Island, Jamestown, ...
Items: 2 | Visits: 7
Created by: Rachel Smith
-
Compatibility matters
The lessons of Massachusett...
Items: 6 | Visits: 10
Created by: Gary Edwards
Diigo is about better ways to research, share and collaborate on information. Learn more »
Join Diigo