narkive

unknown

1970-01-01 00:00:00 UTC

not jquery mobile. With bootstrap you can also have the equivalent
of colored themes.
Thanks,
-Victor
--------------------------------------------------------------------
----------
_______________________________________________
mantisbt-dev mailing list
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mantisbt-dev> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mantisbt-dev

----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------- _______________________________________________
mantisbt-dev mailing list
<https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mantisbt-dev> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mantisbt-dev

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Slashdot TV.
Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters.
http://tv.slashdot.org/
_______________________________________________
mantisbt-dev mailing list
mantisbt-***@lists.sourceforge.net <mailto:mantisbt-***@lists.sourceforge.net>
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mantisbt-dev
--
AlainD.

------=_NextPart_001_0002_01CFC0C7.85B7E4C0
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" 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></style></head><body lang=EN-GB link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1>Right, having mocked up a logon page under UIKit also, I’m finding the following page request sizes for the first hit to the logon page:<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>Mantis - Current - 158KB<o:p></o:p>UIKit - 208KB<o:p></o:p>Foundation - 272KB<o:p></o:p>Bootstrap - 378KB<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>Paul<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p>From: Alain D'EURVEILHER [mailto:***@gmail.com] Sent: 25 August 2014 16:26 To: developer discussions Subject: Re: [mantisbt-dev] Introducing MantisBT Modern UI<o:p></o:p><o:p> </o:p><div><div><div><div><div><div>Hi every one,<o:p></o:p></div>Wow! All that orange color scares me a lot, on the Foundation style (If I may give my preferences as well).<o:p></o:p></div>For now on the 3, I definatelly go for the Mantis 1.3 and Bootstrap.<o:p></o:p></div>Although I am really fine with the Mantis 1.3 (sort of get used to it) I have a preference for the bootstrap version, because it's new and soft. And also because I'm starting to get used to this framework myself by working on another tool (using the ace template too by the way).<o:p></o:p></div>I did not know about the ligth uikit, and I like it. If is is really much lighter, I think I would prefer uikit, considering the era of mobile devices we live with today. After all the main components used by bootstrap are defined in UiKit so. Also, to be sure about the size, I think the comparison should take all the uikit core + the different add-ons if needed in Mantis (autocomplete, validation etc...) + the mantis customizations.<o:p></o:p></div><div>Regards, AlainD.<o:p></o:p></div><o:p> </o:p></div><div><o:p> </o:p><div>On Mon, Aug 25, 2014 at 4:25 PM, P Richards <<a href="mailto:***@mantisforge.org" target="_blank">***@mantisforge.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p><blockquote style='border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0cm'><div><div>I spent the last couple of days trying to theme a few of the common end-user pages i.e. not the management bit  with foundation - that actually comes in slightly smaller in terms of data transfer, and also taking a look at the bootstrap PR.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>I'm slowly coming to the conclusion that given the approach we've gone so far, and plugins - and that we spent some effort into trying to make the current master have better css etc, that I'm probably against adding a bulky framework to mantis.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>I do want to have a play with <a href="http://getuikit.com/" target="_blank">http://getuikit.com/</a> as that's a slightly lighter framework, just to decide whether it's case of I'm not a fan of current design's, or not a fan of some of the bulkier frameworks.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>Having played around, there's definitely some things in the bootstrap theme changes that I'm not keen on, and equally there's some things in the DIFF that don't make sense (false<>true's switch around) - not sure if that's intentional or not as it certainly looks like it may be bugs. The filter box also is fairly broken on the browser I tried.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>In terms of foundation, some of the way they name classes, and organise things seems to be more natural coming from where we are with Mantis and our current naming/css.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>I’ve included 3 images in a table below – showing the foundation version, current 1.3 and the bootstrap version. I could write out my opinions on the positives/negatives of all 3 images, but I don’t want to do that (just yet) so that others can have a think about what they’d actually want. The only thing I would like to do is do a new version of the middle one, with some updated css, and a 4th version using uikit to get a good comparison.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p><table class=MsoNormalTable border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=0 style='border-collapse:collapse'><tr><td width=208 valign=top style='width:155.8pt;border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt'><img border=0 width=378 height=437 id="_x0000_i1025" src="cid:***@01CFC0C7.84EF64A0"><o:p></o:p></td><td width=208 valign=top style='width:155.85pt;border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;border-left:none;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt'><img border=0 width=378 height=163 id="_x0000_i1026" src="cid:***@01CFC0C7.84EF64A0"><o:p></o:p></td><td width=208 valign=top style='width:155.85pt;border:solid windowtext 1.0pt;border-left:none;padding:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt'><img border=0 width=378 height=351 id="_x0000_i1027" src="cid:***@01CFC0C7.84EF64A0"><o:p></o:p></td></tr></table> <o:p></o:p>In terms of Mantis, and this is something I’ve said before, we have about 5 ‘key’ components that I’d expect a user to use on a daily basis:<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>a)      Logon Screen – First Page that anyone sees!<o:p></o:p>b)      “My View”<o:p></o:p>c)       “View Issues”<o:p></o:p>d)      “View Issue”<o:p></o:p>e)      “Report Issue”<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>Seperately to that, we have 3 components that are either separate or integrated – but lesser used:<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>a)      Installation Process – Separate to mantis<o:p></o:p>b)      Management screens – within Mantis, but only seen by admins<o:p></o:p>c)       Flexiblity to end users provided by plugins etc<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>Personally, I think we really need to decide what we’d like a the views (a-e) to look like, because, whilst I agree we need to modernise slightly, I’m not sure that throwing in a big framework is necessarily the best fit. <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>I’m going to go off and create a logon screen using (uikit), and also modernising the logon screen in 1.3 to get some updated comparison screen shots.  In the mean time, it would be interesting to know from others what they like/dislike about the current and variants I posted above (which I’ve deliberately left my personal views of what bits of each I like out of this email to get some fair design ideas J)<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>Paul<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p><div>-----Original Message----- From: Roland Becker [mailto:<a href="mailto:***@atrol.de" target="_blank">***@atrol.de</a>] Sent: 18 August 2014 21:01 To: developer discussions; Paul Richards<o:p></o:p></div><div>Subject: Re: [mantisbt-dev] Introducing MantisBT Modern UI<o:p></o:p></div> <o:p></o:p>Paul,<o:p></o:p><div><div> <o:p></o:p>it seems your main concern is using Bootstrap<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>> We set a policy in january that before we accept any external library <o:p></o:p>> changes etc, we need to have a discussion on the mailing list.<o:p></o:p>> And that’s aside from the fact that we need to have a discussion <o:p></o:p>> around whether to use bootstrap.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>Let's start the discussion and get a decision: Use Bootstrap or not.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>I can't contribute that much to this decision as I have no own experience using Bootstrap or any other comparable component.<o:p></o:p>I don't want to vote just because I read a few articles and comparisons about it.<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>What I noticed is a big amount of transferred CSS and JavaScript compared to the current version. (about additional 700KB when opening for the first time, but also more traffic for following requests)<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>Are there any known issues using Bootstrap?<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>Roland<o:p></o:p> <o:p></o:p>> Paul Richards <<a href="mailto:***@mantisforge.org" target="_blank">***@mantisforge.org</a>> hat am 18. August 2014 um 09:16<o:p></o:p>> geschrieben:<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> On 18 Aug 2014, at 01:00, Victor Boctor <<a href="mailto:***@gmail.com" target="_blank">***@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> Paul,<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> On Aug 17, 2014, at 2:23 AM, P Richards <<a href="mailto:***@mantisforge.org" target="_blank">***@mantisforge.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> Rafiq,<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> As i’ve seen on the PR, and when you originally said you were looking <o:p></o:p>> at this a month ago, and asked you to mail the Mailing List, we need <o:p></o:p>> to have a discussion about the design and the approach.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> [Victor] Correct.  The request from you when Rafik sent out a preview <o:p></o:p>> was to publish the code and the discussion to the DL, which he just <o:p></o:p>> did.  Your words were that even though the decision to use bootstrap <o:p></o:p>> is likely to be a short discussion, it is worth having anything.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> [Victor] The bootstrap decision really started when the website was <o:p></o:p>> developed.  At this time, bootstrap was used and the request by the <o:p></o:p>> team from the Rafik was to do the same modernization to MantisBT.  <o:p></o:p>> Hence, he started doing the work.  As for plugins, they are typically <o:p></o:p>> easy to adapt to whatever framework MantisBT is using.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> Actually, I said we should have a be having a discussion on the <o:p></o:p>> mailing list and before writing code:<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> "Whilst I suspect that is probably a good choice, we should have been <o:p></o:p>> having a discussion on whether bootstrap is the way to go with Mantis <o:p></o:p>> or something else before writing any code.”<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> We set a policy in january that before we accept any external library <o:p></o:p>> changes etc, we need to have a discussion on the mailing list.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> And sorry, the website was something that was also done without <o:p></o:p>> discussion initially - so that’s not really a valid point. The website <o:p></o:p>> has always been a separate code base to Mantis.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> One of the main requests from users in the past, is that users want <o:p></o:p>> slightly different thing’s - i.e. people want to be able to customise <o:p></o:p>> the look and feel of mantis in different ways.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> [Victor] I’m not personally in favor of too much customization to the UI.<o:p></o:p>>  In my opinion, a lot of the users that heavilty themed Mantis in the <o:p></o:p>>past  were motivated to improve the look.  However, what we really need <o:p></o:p>>to focus  on is the ability for users to continue to be able to extend <o:p></o:p>>MantisBT via  plugins.  If we get into theming, we can support color <o:p></o:p>>shade (e.g. green  template, blue template, etc) rather than complete <o:p></o:p>>customization.  Complete  customization adds little value and can <o:p></o:p>>significantly increase complexity  of code and test matrix.  I believe <o:p></o:p>>users evaluate MantisBT evalute it  based on functionalty, look, and <o:p></o:p>>extensions to fill gaps that we don’t have  in core or integrate their own custom functionality.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> We’ve had a lot of questions over the years to allow alteration of <o:p></o:p>> bits of Mantis. What we’ve always done is been flexible with the <o:p></o:p>> approach - hence the fact today we have configuration variables for everything.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> If you consider the design of Mantis and the number of pages, we have <o:p></o:p>> 7 main things users use / want to customise:<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> a) header<o:p></o:p>> b) menu bar<o:p></o:p>> b) page content -> view issue<o:p></o:p>> c) page content -> view issues<o:p></o:p>> d) page content -> report issue<o:p></o:p>> e) page content -> my view page<o:p></o:p>> f) footer<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> When people have gone in the past “it should be possible to <o:p></o:p>> template/theme whole of mantis’, personally - I can’t see people doing <o:p></o:p>> that, or it being sustainable for us.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> However, I can see companies that want to brand mantis replacing A+F <o:p></o:p>> in the list above, and potentially B<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> In terms of B/C/D/E - I suspect you would not touch the design of C/E, <o:p></o:p>> but the ability to tweak B+D is where most drivers come from.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> For example, I scrapped the report issues page at work a long term ago <o:p></o:p>> as it was not suitable for non-technical users. And within Mantis at <o:p></o:p>> the time, the flexibility we provide for customising it does not <o:p></o:p>> exist. This is actually one block of Mantis where i’d agree with the <o:p></o:p>> people wanting support for templates.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> View Issue I didn’t touch as it’s mainly technical staff that use it, <o:p></o:p>> however if the ability existed to template it properly, would be tweaked.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> In it’s current form, this PR isn’t suitable for this - For example - <o:p></o:p>> whilst it’s nicer, the reason I use mantis is due to the way it can be <o:p></o:p>> integrated into other systems - so the side bar is a no go.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> [Victor] I’m not sure what you mean by integrating MantisBT in other <o:p></o:p>> systems and why the side bar blocks that?<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> Mantis has always been a top down design - if you replace the <o:p></o:p>> header/footer you can embed the remaining content within another page, <o:p></o:p>> leaving the menu at the top for navigation.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> For most end users, Mantis consists of 4 pages:<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> 1) My View Page<o:p></o:p>> 2) View Issues Page<o:p></o:p>> 3) Report Issues Page<o:p></o:p>> 4) View Issue Page<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> I think we can do a better job then the current theme if we focus on <o:p></o:p>> looking at the design and the ability to customise these 4 pages.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> For example, in a modern system, the “My View” page I would have <o:p></o:p>> expect to be a ajax dashboard.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> I sent an email a few weeks ago now for feedback on using DataTables <o:p></o:p>> to ajaxify the View Issues list.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> [Victor] This is just a scoping exercise.  The first iteration’s goal <o:p></o:p>> is to improve the look and use a more modern code styling.  Once this <o:p></o:p>> is in, we can follow up by enriching specific page to make it use <o:p></o:p>> ajax.  Good examples are “My View” and filter page.  Once Rafik’s <o:p></o:p>> change is checked in, we can all collaborate on enriching specific pages as necessary.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> For 3/4, the requests tend to be to allow fields to be re-ordered, <o:p></o:p>> turned on/off.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> At the moment, the work doesn’t help any of these requests from users.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> [Victor] Agreed on these features, but think of Rafik’s change as a <o:p></o:p>> foundation work for these features.  I don’t see how there is a <o:p></o:p>> conflict between these features and styling of pages.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> Whilst I did try to have a look at the Pull Request, there seems to be <o:p></o:p>> a number of Whitespace changes, and non-theme/design changes that make <o:p></o:p>> it impossible to review the patches.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> [Victor] I agree that the change has some white spacing issues that <o:p></o:p>> cause more changes than actually needed.  Maybe Rafik can explore of <o:p></o:p>> this issue can be fixed with reasonable effort.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> Back in January, we agreed as a Team to get 1.3 shipped, and then look <o:p></o:p>> at UI and email notifications changes. Victor knows I’ve got some work <o:p></o:p>> on templating emails and pages within Mantis from back then, which I <o:p></o:p>> said I’d get a PR up for once the Database changes had been done - <o:p></o:p>> which we agreed as a team to do immediately after 1.3. So until we’ve <o:p></o:p>> done this, compared the two approaches and decide which route we want <o:p></o:p>> to go, i’m strongly against this getting merged.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> [Victor] Here is a case where you also have gone and implemented some <o:p></o:p>> change without discussion with the team.  At that point I had <o:p></o:p>> discussed email templating (not UI tempting) and proposed an approach, <o:p></o:p>> some previews, and you complained and stopped the work.  I’ve asked <o:p></o:p>> you then to share your code / approach and you haven’t. You just <o:p></o:p>> killed the momentum and said that you will publish your code by end of <o:p></o:p>> January then after 1.3.  At that point we also agreed that code that <o:p></o:p>> is not published doesn’t exist and can’t be used to block other work.  <o:p></o:p>> Rafik has shared a preview of this work with the team 1-2 month ago <o:p></o:p>> and everyone except you on the core team was excited and gave him UI <o:p></o:p>> level feedback which he addressed.  So, I expect this code to be <o:p></o:p>> merged.  The discussion is when exactly it is going to be merged based on the 1.3 plan.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> We agreed to ship 1.3 first so…<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> When rafiq shared a preview with people 1-2 months ago was when i <o:p></o:p>> jumped in immediately and said:<o:p></o:p>> a) we should be discussing this on the dev list.<o:p></o:p>> b) we need to have a discussion on whether to go with bootstrap.<o:p></o:p>> c) I believe I said in the same post, we need to have a discussion on <o:p></o:p>> sidebar on the dev list.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> It’s really disappointing actually for me that Rafik has refused for 2 <o:p></o:p>> months to email the development list as it’s not enabled a discussion <o:p></o:p>> to take place properly. I think I said in the same email that I quite <o:p></o:p>> liked the design.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> Rafik is someone that’s never contributed to Mantis before, has never <o:p></o:p>> been introduced to us apart from dumping a website re-design and now <o:p></o:p>> has added a<o:p></o:p>> 10,000 line commit, which is basically impossible to review.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> My purpose for asking him to communicate with the development list 2 <o:p></o:p>> months ago was so that we could have a discussion at an EARLY stage.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> As it is, until we get a PR that doesn’t contain X000 lines of <o:p></o:p>> incorrect whitespace changes in the first commit, it’s actually <o:p></o:p>> impossible to even attempt to review and look at what has been done. <o:p></o:p>> And that’s aside from the fact that we need to have a discussion around whether to use bootstrap.<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> Paul<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 1:11 AM, Victor Boctor <<a href="mailto:***@gmail.com" target="_blank">***@gmail.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p>> <o:p></o:p>> > Paul,<o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> > On Aug 17, 2014, at 2:23 AM, P Richards <<a href="mailto:***@mantisforge.org" target="_blank">***@mantisforge.org</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> > Alain,<o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> > It’s even more painful, when it’s a big change, and changes the <o:p></o:p>> > approach we go in Mantis - hasn’t been discussed on the mailing <o:p></o:p>> > list, and there’s work in progress (well, on hold until after 1.3) <o:p></o:p>> > to allow greater flexibility of theming mantis already. We agreed <o:p></o:p>> > back in January to use the following approach regarding external libraries:<o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> > [Victor] When Rafik contributed the new website in January, he was <o:p></o:p>> >asked  by several on the team to help out with doing the same for MantisBT itself.<o:p></o:p>> >  Hence, his contribution.  He has used Bootstrap on the website and <o:p></o:p>> >carried  that forward to MantisBT itself.  Given that he has followed <o:p></o:p>> >through with  this and put this hard word, I would expect that we <o:p></o:p>> >would motivate him for  that and appreciate the good work, rather than just being negative.<o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> > Now, in terms of Rafiq’s work, I don’t necessarily see it as being a <o:p></o:p>> > major problem (i.e. that we’ve got other work on theming) as I think <o:p></o:p>> > it covers two different things - i.e. Rafiq’s trying to do a visual <o:p></o:p>> > design, anything I’ve looked at tends to be working on allowing <o:p></o:p>> > flexibility/functionality rather then visual effects, so the two probably go together in the end.<o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> > [Victor] Exactly, the visual design is orthogonal to allows users to <o:p></o:p>> > extend MantisBT through plugins.  The believe Rafik’s suggested <o:p></o:p>> > change was focused on revamping the visual design for all features.  <o:p></o:p>> > But to scope the change, it doesn’t try to go further than that.  <o:p></o:p>> > Once it is in, we can add more flexibility and modernize further.<o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> > My main issue is we have plugin’s that add functionality, there’s <o:p></o:p>> > multiple CSS frameworks out there now - Jquery UI, foundation, <o:p></o:p>> > bootstrap etc, that we do need to consider our approach within <o:p></o:p>> > Mantis. I’m pretty confident we could make a similar style using <o:p></o:p>> > query ui, foundation or bootstrap - without two much work, so we need to decide what works best long term.<o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> > [Victor] Bootstrap is a very popular and respected library.  I think <o:p></o:p>> > given that we have this used in the website and the proposed pull <o:p></o:p>> > request now, I don’t see why we would go for something else.  <o:p></o:p>> > Bootstrap also provides a good story for responive design allowing <o:p></o:p>> > us to have great native support for phones over time.<o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> > The reason I started looking at using Jquery UI in the past (we <o:p></o:p>> > actually moved the Jquery UI javascript from a plugin to the Mantis <o:p></o:p>> > Core) was due to it being used by some plugins, and having the <o:p></o:p>> > visual theme roller - which struck me as something that would allow <o:p></o:p>> > an end user without HTML or CSS experience to brand Mantis into <o:p></o:p>> > their company colours without very much work. Given that Mantis has <o:p></o:p>> > found a whole bunch of uses - for both software development and <o:p></o:p>> > non-software development workflows, this struck me originally as an easy win for end users and plugin author’s for styling.<o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> ><o:p></o:p>> > [Victor]