This new design is based on input from L&ET and from users. Details about the development can be found on the Search Widget Project Page.
The one shown is intended for the Carrier and CISAT front pages. Greg B plans to work with Media Resources, Music, and Special Collections to create ones that make the most sense for their front pages.
We hope to have at least the Carrier/CISAT one ready to go before Fall semester starts, and would love to have all of them done in time for Fall semester.
What do you think? Click on "Comments" below to read other comments and leave your own.
33 comments:
I really like the search widget approach! I love the rollover tooltips that explain each tab - nice, brief text that I can take in at a glance. I like the FAQs. How on earth did you get so much content in a tiny space, so clearly? It is compact like a nut but branching like a tree. Awesome.
Personally, I want my search results to open in a new window because there's no connection "back" to where I started (the search widget) on the results pages - but maybe most users wouldn't.
The Articles tooltips is a bit wordy for me -- how about, "In-depth, focused information with a contemporary point of view."
Under Journals, I didn't understand the links, "Search for Text by Article Title" or "Search for Articles by Subject" -- the former seems to look up articles? and should be on the articles tab? and the latter link didn't work for me so I'm not sure what it does.
For the Search Widget, can ISBN be in the drop down menu?
Also could WorldCat and Other books be in a smaller font, so that folks who are new to the library would realize that they should look in LEO first?
As I click on the various tabs, the size of the search widget changes. The whole column shifts as you toggle between the displays.
I really like the pop down that happens when you choose Example of a journal title under the Journals Toggle. Would it be possible to have Example of a LEO search under the Books tab?
Overall, I really like this widget. A couple of suggestions, though:
1. I think the mouseover descriptive text is too long. My first preference would be to omit them completely -- the tab labels should be enough IMO. But if the descriptions are deemed necessary, perhaps limit them to shorter sentence fragments.
2. The "More" tab doesn't appear terribly useful. Seems like there should be chance to insert a search here.
3. Perhaps in addition to or instead of the "More" tab, we could include a "Search Everything" or "Not Sure" tab that would perform the multi-search across all sources.
I agree with what Meris said about WorldCat and Other being in a smaller font...
about the mouseover text: maybe it could be in a smaller font, and also IMHO we don't need to use complete sentences. I do think the Journals tab needs the language (that's there) about how it includes newspapers and magazines.
First of all, I am excited to see a new and improved widget, but I think it still needs some work.
I am using the widget from home. The mouseovers covers up the search box. The pull-down menus on the search box show through the mouseover boxes, making them difficult to read. Also, it's hard to make the mouseovers go away so that you can get to the search box. I don't think they are helpful for the types of sources: books, articles, etc. I would not want to see them every time I use the widget. Can we eliminate them? We can use a small amount of text above each search box to tell what the user is getting there, like the books one does.
I do like the mouseover of the example for Journals, but it does not display properly. The text, Example????, shows up overtop of the Search button, making it impossible for me to read the rest of the link text.
When the front page loads, you can see all the search boxes for the various components of the widget for a good while before they collapse into one widget.
When the final widget is loaded, I see that it nearly pushes LEO, Periodical Locator, Research Databases, and other important research tools off the screen. I don't think users will want to scroll down to get to these resources.
I think that this search widget is definitely an improvement from the existing widget :) I do have a few comments/suggestions though...
The Book Tab: When I'm using the book tab to search LEO, I don't like that it erases my search terms if I select something else from the drop down box. For instance, if I type in "Bronte, Charlotte" and then decide to choose either Author or Subject from the drop down menu, it completely erases my search terms. That's a bit annoying.
Also, with regards to the book tab, it would be extremely helpful to have a second drop down that allowed users to limit to either format or location. For example, if I do a search for Hamlet as a title, my results will be a mishmash of films, books, and scores. Usually if people search for something like Hamlet, they want a particular format.
I noticed that the "more book options" link goes directly to the new book type page. I think that's a good thing to do, but b/c of the way the book type page is set up, at first glance it seems to point only to LEO and WorldCat (even though there is some more there), which are already linked to from the widget. This could be confusing for users.
Other tabs: I also noticed that if I go to another tab (e.g. articles) and then click on one of the links (e.g. Check for Full Text @ JMU: Article Search) and then click the back button to get back to the widget, that it goes to the default tab (books) rather than the last tab I was using (articles). That could also be a bit annoying for users.
Final Thoughts: I know that we discussed what names should go in the tabs in the various meetings we had about the widget, but I'm still not totally comfortable with calling the first tabs books. It really seems to imply that, that is the only thing that can be found in that tab. It could be highly misleading to students who don't understand what can be found in a library catalog (books, journals, scores, microfilm, electronic resources, etc.). I imagine that the more tab is intended to help them find specific formats; however, I'm afraid that will unnecessarily dissect the contents of LEO.
I really don't think we should try to implement this new search widget this fall. We do not have adequate time to review it. Also, we need to allow time for student usability testing. I'm concerned that it does not work in harmony with other projects that people have been working hard on for a long time, such as LEO and R2. I'm afraid if we bring this widget up this month, students will start relying on it and will not use the full LEO or the R2 pages. I thought we were going to test the Multisearch before using it. Also, at this point we don't have time to change our handouts, PowerPoints, etc before school starts.
Now that I've expressed reservations about bringing up the widget this fall, let me give some specific concerns:
1. Books - This tab is really LEO, which offers so much more than books. Students can and should learn that the library catalog is the main tool to use for books and other materials in a library collection. Please consider calling this tab "LEO Catalog". I dread explaining to students that if you want a video, all you have to do is look under books. That doesn't make sense. Could we please have a vote at a library faculty meeting on what this tab should be called? I would like to see a pulldown for location/type for the LEO search, like many other libraries have. I agree with others who have said WorldCat should be in small font.
Articles - I don't think we have had time to review the Multisearch adequately to use it here. My experience with students is that they get much better results when they use "advanced keyword" in databases rather than a simple box that offers no ability to focus.
Journals - Why do we call this Journals rather than Periodical Locator. Unless we change the name of Periodical Locator to Journals, I don't think we should use that term here. We don't want to call one tool by different names; that will be confusing. I don't like the mouseovers at all, but we could explain briefly what you get in text above the search box, "Find full text of journals, magazines, and newspapers in JMU Libraries and online." I think his would be less distracting than the mouseovers.
Other - I wish we could have Course Reserves as a tab.
I had hoped that the widget would be something we could put on all our subject pages, like they do at Oregon State University. I don't think this widget, which focuses on type rather than tool, will be appropriate to put on library subpages. I think we've done a good job with the R2 types pages; I don't think we need the widget to be type-oriented, too. Maybe the R2 types pages could be presented in a pulldown menu below Research by Subject to make the types pages more prominent.
If we bring the widget up this fall before it's ready, I don't think it will be easy to make changes during the semester. Let's work more on improving it before we bring it up.
Forgive the North Carolina slant, but I'd like to point to 2 examples of very effective search/find tools on university library Web sites.
UNC-Chapel Hill Libraries
This site doesn't attempt a federated or "one-stop" search function. Instead UNC clearly labels and organizes their catalog search, electronic resources, and periodicals locator.
(On something of a side note, I think UNC's "E-Research Tools" interface offers a strong example of intuitively blending subject guides with R2-like functionality.)
NC State University Libraries
I've pointed to NCSU elsewhere in this blog, but I think it's worth demonstrating again how well they have incorporated the federated search across resources.
To get started, all users have to do is insert some free-text in the "Search" box in the upper-right corner of the home page. The results page sort out catalog hits from database hits from Web site hits in a clean and intuitive manner.
Think of this as the next level of search functionality, a step above our under-development widget that doesn't require users to choose what silo they want to search.
Also worth pointing out on the NSCU site is the Search the Collection page. This is the more traditional approach, giving users the option to limit their search by silo. Though the page is a bit lengthy, I think the options are clearly presented.
Building on what Lynn said about the timing and rollout date, for me there seems to be a lack of certainty about on this point and a feeling that the widget is in the works for a formal release for the beginning of classes. I went to the project page seeking clarity on the timeline of the widget redesign and found it on the site as a report on the joint Search Widget/LEO Task Force Meeting on May 11. See:
http://staffweb.lib.jmu.edu/info/news.aspx?id=207
At the end of the notes were these remarks under the heading: Regarding Beta Versions and Final Versions
"After getting and working with input from L&ET staff (likely in May and June), both projects will likely be ready to share with the public in a beta roll-out. We'll add links to them in visible spots and encourage comments from users, while still maintaining and defaulting to the current versions. Can also use this time for usability testing"
"LEO will likely keep beta status until December at earliest."
"Search widget can be finalized before that (likely by end of summer). When it is, we can add a "Try out New LEO" tab to help transition to new LEO."
So my question is, are we still on track with the above plan? My hope is that we are and that we will have an approprate amount of time to evaluate and usability test as a beta site before a final release of the widget and new LEO.
We've spent a lot of time branding LEO; the term LEO: the library catalog is used in GFTG (and students are tested on it). Books as a tab heading will require extra explanation in library instruction rather than reinforcing terms we want students to know. As some others have mentioned, the mouseover is wordy, unnecessary, and gets in the way. I really like the dropdown box that makes title, author, call number searches quickly available.
I'm not sure that the multi-search is ready to go for fall, as others have noted. New users are sure to be confused about the Articles vs. Journals tabs. If we have general multi-search as part of the widget, then we should label the tab "Multi-Search" and brand it so users get to know it; we should also explain on the widget specifically what it does, e.g., "Searches 6 of our general databases at once."
Journals tab: use Periodical Locator instead--consistency of tool names across tabs. Mouseovers for Articles/Journals not necessary when tools are identified. As for More, this isn't live so not sure what's going there.
I believe our current widget is used primarily for two purposes:
1. To search LEO
2. To use Periodical Locator
Maybe it would be good to make an incremental improvement on our current widget by having a simple widget with only two tabs:
LEO Catalog
Periodical Locator
This would be very useful and easy to understand (and teach).
I don't think we are ready to have an Articles tab on a Widget. Articles can be dealt with in another way.
Regarding the overall concept of the widget: I very much appreciate all the hard work that has gone into developing the mockup. This is not an easy task!
1. Regarding the widget and in particular, LEO - as it is currently displayed on the Carrier Library homepage:
I would like to second the concerns and comments made by several others about the way in which LEO is currently represented in the widget. In particular, I am concerned that we are misrepresenting the full functionality of this database - which provides access to our holdings in a vast array of formats – not just "Books" as the tab seems to indicate. (We have access to tens of thousands of non-book titles via LEO - including music, maps, manuscripts, sound recordings, videos, and more.) By emphasizing the “books” category to the exclusion of other formats we inadvertently risk destroying the overall integrity of this important database. Like Melissa, I wonder if we really need to "unnecessarily dissect the contents of LEO" - and I would add, "especially" in this place and at this point on the Carrier Library HOME page. . . (This will be particularly true if there will be different widgets for different libraries, etc. on other pages that will appear to provide searching, up-front, by certain formats ONLY: (see the Media Resources widget which, by the way, I think in itself is a great idea.)
Rather than using the term “Books” for the catalog tab on the Library HOME page – how about using the term “Catalog?” – with a succinct definition such as “Search for books, music, videos and more at JMU Libraries” -or something similar.
We could then retain a simple search box with a clearly marked link to an Advanced/Guided Search-
OR
We could create a more fully-developed up-front LEO search on the home page which would still have a link to an Advanced/Guided Search but could also include, on the home page, drop-down boxes/buttons, such as: a drop down list by format and/or another drop down list by location. This is possible and has been done on other III OPACs.
Also, as has already been commented, I, too, would like to see the font size for WorldCat reduced to a smaller font. And, regarding the link to more books: this is nice to see but it again misleads the public as to what an OPAC has to offer.
2. Just out of curiosity, I recently reviewed the library HOME pages of all the public academic VIVA libraries to see how they were displaying access to their local OPACs. A quick check of their home pages showed that all prominently use and display a link to their local OPAC - and that all are labeled using the term “Catalog.”
As we all know, the OPAC provides a federated search-type access to the same intellectual content (or different aspects of it) - and sometimes in more than one format iteration. Take, for ex., all the records for a search on or about "Gone with the wind" - in all its manifestations and formats.
--------------
More on the quick check of regional academic library home pages: There seem to be two that are doing something similar to what we are thinking of doing: see VCU:
, at http://www.library.vcu.edu/
and UVa, at http://www.lib.virginia.edu/. (Also see how UVa is treating access to 'collections' with the use of terms reminiscent to our R2 info. types. :-)) In their case, they have clearly indicated a preference for searching the contents of the local OPAC as a whole database rather than attempting to dissect its contents into bits and pieces - while at the same time they are also providing access to some collections via format-type terms.
3. On the side: I agree wholeheartedly with Jason and his comments about NCSU, in particular, and also UNC-Chapel Hill. Both sites, I think, are very effective in what they manage to do. . . .
4. As a general comment: Is there any particular reason why we need to rush the 'staging' of all these complex projects before school begins? (I am not totally clear as to when all or some parts of all this will happen). Above all, I hope that we will be able to coordinate the development and implementation of the widget "in tandem" with the developement of the new LEO - and the federated search. I am particularly concerned that we will not have the time to put all the pieces of this 'bibliographic access' puzzle together as carefully as we are capable of doing if this all is going to be made available this fall. Let's try to continue to build on the positive outcomes of R2.
Thanks - Judy
Re: Jason's comment:
2. The "More" tab doesn't appear terribly useful. Seems like there should be chance to insert a search here.
You're right! The "More" tab is still under development. The intention for this tab is that all of the items listed here will eventually link to separate searches or new widgets. So, clicking on a "Video" link might take you to a LEO video search widget, or a "Research Databases" link could take you to an R2 search widget, etc.
I had similar concerns to Judy regarding how Leo is represented by Books, and by the utility of the More tab, though Greg's clarification helps.
As luck has it, I was with Grover S. in a CSD summer workshop this past week, and a couple faculty there were anxious about finding the chore of video, online and in-collection, through Leo. One at least was noticeable relieved--and surprised!--at the existence of the media center's current search widget. To get that ability visible somehow in the front page widget, and in the new Leo, would be more than welcome.
A thought on the More tab: How about a brief rollover explanation to clarify it before clicking to the specifics? Something like: "Special searches for media, online and in collections on campus". --But yes, this doesn't quite encompass what's already intended under "More".... Yet it gives a preliminary sense of what the tab means when you mouse it.
I would like to echo Lynn’s and Judy’s comments about the Books tab. It doesn’t begin to represent our catalog. The next line does say “books and other items” but when I’m searching I don’t always see the big picture right away. Maybe college students don’t either? Especially when they search our catalog for the first time. Our catalog is rich in non-book materials and it seems like that should be evident in the searching procedure.
Most of the following comments are reiterations/confirmations of what others have said, so thanks to everyone for their good comments.
I agree that 2 tabs would be sufficient for the widget: a LEO (or Catalog) tab; and a Periodical Locator tab. While I understand the interest in a "More" tab, I think that specialized searches could reside on the LEO search page, or elsewhere. I also think that using "LEO Catalog" for the name of the tab would be much more useful and less misleading than the "Books" tab.
Both in the WebPAC group and in other places, the idea of 2 dropdowns on the widget was discussed. Examples were placed on the examples pages put together by Digital Services. This could allow searching across locations and formats, and could give the functionality now provided by the special widgets on the Media Resources page, for example. I'm hopeful that this will continue to be pursued as an enhancement to our widget.
Presently, there are 2 links in the "Books" tab: one goes to the Advanced Word Search, and one goes to the Quick Word Search. I would be in favor of abandoning the link to the Quick Word Search, since that's essentially what you're sitting on in the widget. It would be frustrating to get to a page that duplicates what you have before you (albeit with links to other kinds of searches). Perhaps lending space in this tab to the video search and other specialized searches would make more sense.
The difference between journals and articles is pretty hard to pin down as described on the mouseovers--why not stick to the Periodical Locator designation for consistency, and move the Articles approach off the widget?
The statement that the new homepage and widget are "under development for the fall semester" somehow did not register the first time I read the e-mail directing us to the blog. Now that that has sunk in, I am really, really concerned that we are looking to roll out the federated search tool so soon. If I remember correctly from the meeting where we talked about buying the federated product because it was such a good package deal, the plan was to try it out with a few volunteers who would perhaps feature it on their Research Guides. As it is now, I would not be in favor of having subject "bundles" for any of my liaison departments. I would want input from the department and would also question the usefulness of federated searching for such a big discipline as, for example, history. I like the IU example that Melissa referred to for their multisearch access. Come to think of it, I also like the fact that the IUCAT is accessible from the IU homepage.
I agree with others that the research tools should be at the top of the page, next to the widget. Research is probably the main reason people come to our page, and we're ceding important real estate to News. Heuristic evaluation of library web pages indicates that most people are hitting the library homepage, looking for something specific, and then getting out. We library people are the ones who spend our lives cruising around the library web. If people are looking for news, they'll find it on the page; having news in such an important place is a bit like the commercial websites that intrude on your Google search. Google tends to put those Sponsored Links on the right side of the screen, which is at least a bit less intrusive. That they are up high on the page is a function of Google's desire to make money off of these links, and we don't have a similar objective.
I'd like to see services moved up higher, as well, and we could include Hours in that box rather than in the News box.
There is a lot to look at here, and I'm hopeful that we will give long and thoughtful consideration to all of these changes, and that they will be coordinated with the development of new features in LEO.
RE: Several comments about the limits (drop-down menus) on the "Books" search.
The earlier widget screenshots that we (Digital Services) produced had limit by location and material type drop-down menus featured on the Books (LEO) tab. However, I had technical problems in getting these limits to properly work from the widget. I will continue troubleshooting the limits problem, and I will hopefully have them working when the second version of the "alpha" widget is available for review.
RE: Meris' suggestion to decrease the font size of the "WorldCat" and "Other books" links.
Great idea! Look for that change in version 2 of the "alpha" widget.
RE: Widgets on other branch libraries' home pages
I am, or will soon be, working with the other branch libraries -- CISAT, Music Library, Media Resources, and Special Collections -- in integrating a version of the new widget concept into their home pages.
I haven't even read through all the comments yet and I'm seeing (and hearing from Greg B) a lot of anxiety about when this thing will be rolled out for the Carrier and CISAT front pages.
Let's remove all that anxiety by deciding right now that the search widget will not be ready for the beginning of fall semester! I know that folks are eager to replace the current search box, but I'd hate to introduce new problems in the process.
Greg and I put our heads together and came up with this new target timeline:
August 17: revised end of this comment period
September 10: share with users a revised version based on comments so far; get user feedback and 2nd round of staff feedback
November: roll out new search widget
This schedule is independent of Music, Media and Special Collections (which I'm guessing can move more quickly). Greg will be conferring with folks in each of those areas to work on their focused needs.
Phew! Anxiety lifted!
One reason I'd like to see the Research Tools moved to a more prominent location (like where News is) is that I have to scroll down to get to the research tools with the new widget. I have my resolution set at 1024 X 768. I think any library home page should have the catalog, periodical locator, and databases within sight without having to scroll. For instruction, too, it's really important to be able to show students these major tools on the web page in a visible location.
re: the tips text when you rollover the tabs
This was purely based on suggestions made in the widget workshop by a group dominated by new employees and students. They suggested that we explain what articles or journals are good for. Funny, but that's not something we really do obviously. Sounded like a great opportunity to incorporate some instruction into the front page.
The text is lifted from Go for the Gold. I see what you mean about it being too long for this context.
Anyone have any suggestions of wording for new, shorter versions?
A suggestion on tab design: Could we soften the edges on these? With their harsh right angles, they're just ugly. Rounded corners would be more aesthetically pleasing.
re: Melissa's note about More book options
Hmmm. I see exactly what you mean. I'm going to send a suggestion to Jerry and Judy that they add some general ebooks to that page. If that doesn't make sense to them, then maybe we should just get rid of that link?
re: Jason's NSCU example
I'm with you on these NC examples. Really good ones. I think that NCSU's website is beautifully interconnected and developed.
I agree that their search example is a next level beyond this simple widget that we are working on. We aren't there yet, but I think NCSU is a great example to keep in mind when we do get there.
It's also a great example that points to what you've mentioned at least once...the idea of including all the L&ET pages in a federated search.
Thanks for pointing this one out. It's always good to look at inspirations!
Thanks for all the comments about "books" for the tab label. Some of you also mentioned the "journals" tab, too.
This mockup was based on the work done by the search widget workshop. See the results of the tab-label part of the session. There was plenty of debate on if we should use "Books" (i.e. a type), "LEO"/"Catalog" (i.e. the tool) on one of the tabs.
Types rather than tools won out without as much debate for the other tabs.
Just for reference in case you are trying to remember, of the fifteen attendees to that session, 4 were student employees, 2 were faculty/staff with less than 3 months experience in our library, and 9 were faculty/staff with more experience in our library. The participants came from Reference, Digital Services, Cataloging, Circulation, Media Resources, and Serials. Pretty good representation of both user-types and library-types.
Looking at other library websites, I see examples that use types on the tabs (like this mockup) as well as ones that refer to "catalog" for just one and types for all the rest.
I see the pros and cons of the various options, especially for the books/catalog/LEO tab. The comment about dissecting LEO really speaks to me. Don't want to do that!
Here's why I like this mockup:
The tabs are intended to guide the user to what they are seeking regardless of what they know about our particular library or libraries in general.
The content in the search area is then intended to teach the user more about the tool or tools that get to what they seek.
For the Carrier and CISAT pages, the "books" tab would presumably be the default search. That means that "LEO Library Catalog" is located prominently when the user first comes to the page.
I remember a great suggestion made in Digital 1-2-3 but don't remember who said it: "Make the initial page http://www.lib.jmu.edu/ more of a teaching tool." I think this mockup works towards that.
What I'd like to do is work on the language in the search areas to try to avoid that "dissection" concern while still keeping the language on the tabs that makes it easier for new users to zero in on what they need.
Next step would be to test it on users and get further comments from library folks. Let's plan on doing that in a group setting so folks can converse about this one more easily.
re: Course Reserves on widget
Doh! That was my oversight. Course Reserves was absolutely on the list of tabs to include.
Thanks!
Since the widget is so controversial, may I suggest that a second widget be designed that would address many of the concerns expressed by public service librarians. Both widgets could be available for users to try out. It seems like this would be relatively easy, and it might help determine what users prefer if they have a choice.
Just had a great conversation with Judy and it echoes some of Jeff's and Glenn's comments, I think.
Since this mockup doesn't include the "more" things fleshed out, I now see that it isn't expressing the intention to have LEO on many tabs. A Video tab, for instance, would look a lot like the Book tab, but with the tips and extra tools focused on videos. Same with Audio, Course Reserves and all other tabs/types where LEO is the best tool.
I'm hoping that if the description of LEO on each of those clearly explains that LEO includes lots of different things, and if we can get the limit drop down working on there, then we are expressing the wealth that is in LEO while also guiding inexperienced users to LEO when it's the best tool.
Jennifer, isn't it more educational to teach new users the name of our catalog by using it, instead of implying that only books can be found with that tab (unless they read further on a mouseover)? I guess the onus of the education would be on me, to explain in each instruction session what LEO is called and does.
I think I was in a group at the workshop that came up with the tab "Books" but when we went to the next step of designing the widget on the board, the group got bogged because of our terminology choice. I hate to think we are on the record because of our group's initial and tentative attempt.
I would be very much interested in seeing how two different versions of the same widget would compare, as regards to functionality: 1) a version that incorporated LEO format and/or location drop downs as mentioned by Greg in his message of Aug. 13th (5:11 pm) - using the Catalog (and/or LEO) terminology, and 2) a version that clearly defines LEO along the lines of Jennifer's Aug. 16th, 6:11 pm message. Why not see how they would compare, side by side? I am sure that both would have much to offer our users.
Just a few last comments.
I'm pleased that the test widget allows the user to use a drop-down to select a specific kind of search. This is a definite improvement over the strictly keyword search approach on our current widget. I'm also pleased to know that Greg is working on inserting a 2nd drop-down on the LEO widget. This would really improve the usefulness of the simple LEO search from the homepage.
Jennifer referred to the results of the search widget workshop as the background for using the tabs for types rather than tools (e.g., Books, not LEO). From the notes posted about the meeting, and from my personal recollection, it seems that there really was no true consensus on this. I recall more indecision than commitment to the "Books" approach, as well as to other questions broached at the meeting. Taking more time to reflect on this might have altered the outcome of the workshop. Reba, a member of the "Book group," alludes to this in her recent blog entry. I guess I still think that we should continue to teach students what LEO Catalog is, in all its richness and variety, rather than potentially confuse them when they go to the homepage to find some library holding that is not a book.
If it is written in stone that this tab is going to stay "Books," this increases the importance of changing the mouseover so that it does not just define what a book is. This only reinforces the false impression that you will only retrieve books by searching in this tab.
I like the idea of having 2 different models for folks to try out for a while before these changes are implemented.
My blogging days are at an end!
Post a Comment