[Sina]: So, I can go over a couple of things. So, we started working together because the MCA was launching a new website. And so the new website had a lot of, as these projects do, goals, some of them competing some of them aligning, and accessibility was one of the goals there. And so we started talking very early. The reason I’m pointing this out is because that doesn’t often happen, so for those of you who are in the accessibility space, you’ll know a couple of different recipes, one of them is, “we launched two years ago and we should really get on that, so, yeah, what are your thoughts on our website?” Others are “Yeah, we totally know that it is inaccessible, but we don’t have the funds to deal with it” and et cetera And yet others are “Oh yeah, we’re going to be really great. We’re definitely going to involve accessibility and usability and all that stuff like that,” about one week before launch. Sounds like a good plan. So that’s some of the things that often happen in this space. And lead to less than optimal results, right? because it’s the architecture model. If you think about it at the end, after a family has been living in the house adding a room is very expensive. But if you think about it at the blueprint phase, it costs a little extra money maybe, but you’re talking to the architect, your tearing down walls, redrawing lines, things like that. Same with accessibility. Started working with these guys on accessibility, of the website and we have some thoughts to share with you on that. One of the consequences of doing accessibility on a museum website, actually an art museum, is that there’s art. And so this art is on the web. And now we have an issue. We can’t just say, images don’t have alt text.
That’s not a one-liner anymore. You can have ten thousand images, all of a sudden, that’s a really big commitment. You can’t just slip that one by. So we really started to have these serious discussion about images needing to be described and what does that even mean? What about if it’s art? Yeah, ok, we have some very good standards for describing an infographic like a pie chart but what does it mean to describe a work of art? And what about different authors having different opinions and biases and so on and so forth. And this lead to the creation of a tool here at the MCA called Coyote. Coyote is nothing more than a web application. It’s a web-based application, that happens to be accessible. Which is a little ironic given what is does. What is does is the workflow management for describing images. So, if you have a lot of images, which the MCA does, assigning descriptions to that is a lot harder than just a field in WordPress or a field in Drupal for example. because there are different languages perhaps, there are short descriptions and long descriptions there are multiple descriptions for a single photo, or the opposite of that problem, the same image being used in different ways, across the website. In this case, it’s just a thumbnail for the restaurant, but over here, it’s the actual focus, it’s the featured image for the restaurant page. Those might have different meanings. The other thing is that, some of you might be thinking well, when it’s used as an icon or a link or button, that’s really important for, let’s say blind users but , what’s the point in describing it in other senses. Then it’s just decorative. We hear this word a lot in accessibility with respect to decorative images. But because it’s such a part of the institution, and I’m speaking a little bit for you here, because it’s such a core part of the institution, and the aesthetic, the information content, the actual meaning behind the work that’s done here, Susan and Anna rightfully felt that that this needs to be really well described, this needs to be part of the core tenons of the usability model of somebody coming to the website. So, what we started doing was started putting these descriptions into Coyote and I think I’ll let these guys talk about that a little bit, then what I was thinking was we can project if we want to, but honestly, I got a speaker set up here, we can get some good volume I’m happy to let a screen reader read you guys some descriptions, I think there are some sample descriptions as well and you can visit the website on your own device of course as well, which would be fine, if you need to use a particular AT, a particular assistive technology to interact with it. But maybe before we do that, I want to talk just a little about, the effect of description with respect to the curation staff and the awesome, different organizations that got involved. [Susan] Yeah, so as Sina was saying, the task of describing ten thousand images and doing that on an anomaly basis, and then addressing the backlog of images is a pretty daunting one. Just to give you context, really, this is something that as far as we know, no art museum in this country has taken on and committed to. There are projects, in gallery projects, or mobile projects that are accessible and for which images have been described. but nothing on the sort of systematic scale, and so it wasn’t as if we were going to be totally on the hook if we didn’t do this. Which actually makes this a little bit harder. There were some, you know, if the law were pounding down our door, we could sell it. As it is, we were obliged to think about a couple of things. One was selling it to colleagues from throughout the museum. It was pretty clear to me from the very beginning. Sina and I actually disagreed about this, I now recall. When we were first talking about who would do the description, I think that we thought it needed Sina thought it needed to be done within, my, which is publishing, media, that people who had a certain set of skills would be best to do this. And unlike cataloging, I mean I’m a cataloging professional, so I think about those things too. But it didn’t seem to me even remotely possible that it could scale. I mean we’re just not a big enough group. And so we snuck around Sina, and a [Laughter] [Sina] I totally forgot that you did that. [Laughter] [Susan] No, but that first meeting that we had, that big room full of people, we kept telling people “be quiet” [Laughter] [Anna] Well, no. There was this hilarious … we talked about it was going to be five people, it was actually this room full of people. There was this moment when you asked “can you hear me?” And everybody said “Yes!” [Laughter] And Sina was like “oh no.” [Laughter] [Susan] But it was scary because I’m afraid of Sina. [Laughter] [Susan] Also, that find to see how many people. We sent out an email to the staff, and to staff from all other, not just professionals who were involved in creating content but also visitor services, human resources, a lot of different folks who we thought would be good candidates for doing this work. And the response was really really robust. We were asking people to come on their own time, lunch time, and they did. So that was pretty exciting. From our point of view, this is the only way this will sustain this. Otto was saying earlier in a meeting today that we did our first writing sessions as a group because this is not a natural thing necessarily to do. But what we’ve imagined in our heads is that this is the kind of thing that folks would … on a really boring conference call … [Laughter] … on their lunch hour, if they have a little extra flex to it, they would do that. So we built the tool to be something that people could sign in to from where ever, whenever. We had training, from Sina, for a couple of sessions. And the training consisted of a little bit of guideline setting Some basic information about the difference between alt and a long description. But more than anything, a lot of questions that our folks asked, that don’t necessarily come up like in other contexts. Is a picture of Adam and Eve fleeing the Garden of Eden just two naked people running, or is it actually Adam and Eve, how much knowledge do you assume people have really good questions that I have to say, I’ve said this a lot today, we don’t have answers to. We’re really just beginning to compile questions and beginning to think about, how institutions and individuals address those. But the group nature of thinking together about description, what is valuable, what works, what is comfortable to do what are valuable descriptions to end users, that’s a piece we need to tackle next, is sort of in our sights. [Sina] You have the right groups. So the number of descriptions that these guys have been able to pull off is … it started after the first three, four hundred? [Anna] Yeah. [Sina] And it is over one thousand now? [Anna] Actually what was amazing, yeah, it’s well over one thousand now. What was amazing was, adding the counter, one of the features I asked Sina to incorporate into the software was a counter, so you could see how many descriptions were in there. How many images were described. To encourage people to keep going. [Susan] There was even some game theory in there. [Anna] Some departments wanted it to become competitive, so there’s a counter. And so once the counter was active, we had another Coyote group writing session. We had laptops set up in this room again, set up around the room and everyone was writing in pairs And I was just refreshing the homepage of Coyote every fifteen minutes and watching the number go up And in an hour we went from three or four hundred to over a thousand. And now we’re over a thousand and counting [Susan] Of which a very large number are unreviewed because the people who are supposed to be reviewing are [Sina] sitting on either side of me. [Laughter] [Sina] But that does bring up a good point about the review process. So I mentioned workflow earlier, but kind of casually and didn’t define it. So this idea of putting descriptions on images is one thing. Having it really be, again, going back to having accessibility live, I’ve said this a couple times today, having accessibility live as a first class citizen, as part of projects here, projects plural, means that these descriptions get edited, content matters. I’ve seen a lot of upsides, I’m sure you guys have too. My most favorite is accessibility being misspelled. Usually there’s a “C” or an “S” missing. And screen readers say it funny. Which is ironic. But that’s part of the process here. Susan just … the amount of passion and care that goes into digital media here also goes into the accessibility quality. The quality of the content for accessibility. And the descriptions, actually do you have one?
Do you want to read? I can have a screen reader do this as well, and you can go to mcachicago.org and a lot of the graphics there are Oh one quick note, for the folks familiar with short and long description. Right now, just for now, and I will explain why I am saying this in a second, the long descriptions, the lengthier ones if you will, they are stored as the alt text of the image. Yes, we definitely know that alt text is traditionally done … 120, 200 characters or less, but the reason we did that was for maximum compatibility, and then later on, in future cycles and iterations of the development cycle for the website, we’re actually going to roll out … I can talk about that, right? [Susan] Yes, of course. [Sina] We’re going to roll out a feature whereby we’re making visible, and I mean that in every sense of the word, not only to screen reader users but also to every user who can see, and what not, the long descriptions and the short descriptions of these images. And the reason that matters is because of something that Susan always brings up, which is when you start talking to people about this stuff and start talking to them about describing it, or whether, just the fact that the stuff exists, say “Oh, I want to see that.” and right now it’s mainly accessible to using the screen reader, or if you check some things in your browser but we want to make sure that is exposed to all users accessibly, so sure it will be some short descriptions, an alt and a nice widget to expose the longer descriptions for keyboard users but for mouse users and everybody as well so that everybody can benefit from those descriptions. [Anna] Because, ostensibly its close viewing of an artwork, and that’s been the most exciting part, it opens up these artworks. So, I’m going to read a description written by a curator at the MCA of a painting. I will perhaps show it and you can decide. [Laughter] [Anna] and this is a long description. This painting, a realistic portrait, depicts a young African-American woman in a stylish orange coat. In the lower right corner of the image, she holds a thin paint brush in her hand, alongside a flat palette covered in thicks dabs of paint in a variety of colors. The square composition centers on her face and upper body and she looks directly out at the viewer with a calm but commanding gaze. At first, the dark black hue of her skin almost blends in with the black wall that is directly behind her on the left. But her dark complexion also contrasts with the white background of a partially finished painting that appears behind her on the right. Gradually it becomes evident that she is painting a self portrait using a paint by numbers system. On the easel beside her, the figure’s face and body are divided up into smaller shapes, each one outlined in light blue. She has filled in a few of them already with bright orange or mint green from her palette, but she isn’t strictly following actual colors of her own appearance. [Susan] So, Anna said that a curator wrote that, I think that was, oh, sorry, microphone. I think it was interesting about this is that, that isn’t … though it was written by a curator, that’s not actually how our curators write. [Anna] Not at all. [Susan] Before I came here, I worked at the Metropolitan Museum of Art and we had a phrase that we used and it always said disabling, which was that, what you, this is a terrible terrible text, it’s art history for the blind. [Laughter] [Susan] It said exactly that. The sky is blue, the grass is green, the pretty girl is lying on the beach, it was purely descriptive and that was considered to be somehow lesser because it wasn’t interpretive, it wasn’t scholarly and it didn’t contain research [Sina] As opposed to something which I might call rather useless from a vision point of view which is that we can experience a rich plethora of colors the artists youthful age. [Laughter] [Susan] But I understand that person who wrote this would have been raised to disdain art, his grief for the blind, just that kind of description, and he has been one of our most enthusiastic participants because he has found in doing this some value for his practice that has … enforcing him to empathize with the point of view of somebody who doesn’t come to works of art with knowledge that has been gained over years and years and years of study and it’s been really exciting to watch him sort of raise the idea that there are things to be said in simple description of the sort that might actually be as valuable as the writing that he does that takes five years of research. So we’re really excited about how this work is done and that it’s something that is going to bring value to our users and our visitors, but it’s also really helping our staff to think about what we do and why. [Sina] And not only to help the staff but to help someone who, has great twenty-twenty vision and can see the painting just fine. And I read the description and say you know, I never noticed X, Y and Z I never actually picked up on X, Y, and Z and that is a really enriching experience not only for someone who might be experiencing it for the first time, but there’s this, in the gaming world you would call it replay value, right? So there’s this quality though of using accessibility and inclusive design to increase the replay value of visiting an art museum and experiencing these works of art. Yeah sure, you can still see it again and you might get something different out of it of course because that’s one of the essences of art but having this description almost repositions you to appreciate that visual information even if you can see in a different way. [Susan] This is part of the reason why when we built Coyote, it was important for us to allow for multiple description. Which again is one of those, it’s kind of sacrilegious, in this institution. There should be a kind of… [Sina] Thing [Susan] Absolutely, the right description. I don’t believe in that. But it’s really difficult to change a culture that sort of strives for an absolute perfect. and we are … so this is one of the reasons, by the way, I realize that it sounds really icky, that I was saying we had to have these things, they have to be edited, there can’t be subject and predicates because Sina suggested that we could do without verbs … and articles. [Anna] No it was articles. [Susan] No, yeah, okay, definitely not verbs. Also without articles. But … [Sina] For short, just to be clear. [Laughter] [Susan] Part of … yes, for short descriptions. Very well. Part of the reason why we’re being a little bit cautious about the editorial pieces is that I’m a little afraid that we’re just beginning to tip the culture again toward, it’s okay for visitor services staff to describe something because they spent all of this time talking to visitors and trying to understand what they want to know, what they don’t see this is the type of interaction that curators don’t have so they bring that experience to the description it’s pretty exciting to see the ways that the different members of the MCA team are learning from each other about our interaction with the public. That was an unexpected side effect of this whole process. [Sina] I think we want to phrase this a little bit more as a discussion, without raising your hand because that’s useless for me, but … any questions? [Susan] Could you just tap your hand [Laughter] [Sina] Or just speak up … so many burning questions. But any questions or comments on stuff that we discussed so far? I’m totally commandeering … you guys ok with that? [Susan] Yeah [Anna] Of course [Sina] I’m being arbitrary, you spoke up first, in the front, to my right [Renee] Have any of your artists objected to defining, describing their work? My daughter’s a choreographer and she will not say what it means [Susan] We recently published a little factoid about the number of works in our collection that have the title of “untitled” and its a very significant number [Anna] Twenty one percent [Sina] Wow! [Anna Laughing] Contemporary art [Susan] And we published alongside sort of a note that artists will frequently title something untitled so as to allow for interpretation on the part of the viewer, so yeah that’s one reason why artists may object to… [Renee] that was my point [Susan] yes, but the other reason is we might frankly be wrong. We haven’t heard it yet but then we haven’t been engaging with them. I suspect that’ll absolutely happen, but I also think there will be plenty that don’t mind. But this is what you have to do. [Sina] So Anna has a really good story. I mean if you want to tell it. [Anna] About the painter? [Sina] Yeah [Anna] Yeah, so Sina got us all thinking about this all the time. The process of describing [Sina] They actually think about accessibility
Oh my god, our PDFs, they’re not accessible. [Laughter] [Anna] So I called Sina and said “Sina, Help!” [Susan] Tomorrow’s PDF training. [Sina] Yeah, tomorrow is PDF accessibility training. [Laughter] [Renee] How do you get an accessible PDF from a Mac? [Susan] You should come to training tomorrow. [Laughter] [Sina] The answer is, if you are using InDesign, we’ve got it about 95% done already because a lot of those things can be done in InDesign, and you can then export it and the beautiful part about that is the classic problem that you are probably very familiar with which is, some people will make PDFs and they’ll go in and make it accessible, they’ll use Acrobat and things like that, they’re going to make it accessible. Then, somebody comes in and says, guys, the table of contents is wrong, and now you’ve lost all of those accessibility changes, so the fact here is that in fact, I don’t think we’re going to cover any Adobe Acrobat stuff tomorrow all of the accessibility stuff we’re going to do is going to be done at the content authoring level. So if these guys want to go in, they feel totally comfortable making content level changes because the accessibility lives with the document. [Susan] I can see the client look at that calendar, uhhhh. [Anna] I reminded them, they were like yeah yeah yeah… [Susan] So I was like, Sina, if you can make them come to that meeting … [Anna] Actually, a good consultant, just to give a pitch for Sina, I mean the first conversation I had with our lead developer, of the website, after his first phone call with Sina, he was like, “it’s going to be really intense,” but he had this little smile, like it’s going to be really … I’m going to learn a lot like he was really excited about it and that energy and the excitement of … when we sent them this huge task list after our WCAG evaluation, they were like really into it. [Sina] Yeah, that was really weird, actually. [Laughter] [Elizabeth] I’ve had that experience with developers, they are into it, you don’t have to sell the developers because it is a problem to solve and they love that. [Sina] And you shouldn’t go in, I think what happens sometimes in accessibility is … [Susan] Those are developers, we’re talking tomorrow to our designers. [Laughter] [Sina] But you don’t want to go in and call their baby ugly, right? And the answer is let’s do things a different way. In design, I have a buddy of mine who uses the analogy of, for designers, when you think about accessibility, they get way more … they struggle way more with it, in my opinion, than developers do. And to me, I like to tell them, this is from a friend of mine, actually who is going to be leading the PDF accessibility training session, he says, to designers, think of it as working in a different medium and if you are telling me that you can’t be just as creative in clay that you can be in blown glass or what not you know, that’s not the case. You’re going to do all of these amazing things in a different medium and accessibility just ensures that those foundations are really usable by more people. So, there’s just different ways I think of talking to different audiences or being a sociopath as I like to call it. [Laughter] [Anna] I was crossing my fingers this whole time … [Elizabeth] It was interesting you said, calling your baby ugly. I am a UX researcher so my job is to basically tell people that their baby is ugly. In a nice way. [Susan] Oh, so you should see Coyote, so … [Renee] I have a … when I first started hearing your presentation, coming from High Ed., I’m thinking of, how to help all students get through an art history class. Okay, so, I wasn’t thinking of it necessarily as a pleasant experience. You’re taking about going to a museum with a sighted person then. It’s not what you do for fun, but if you have to learn stuff. So that’s how I started thinking about this, but now I’m thinking of … you are aiming for these descriptions to be their own works of art. [Susan] Yes. [Renee] Not art history, but their own works of art, and I think that’s cool. [Susan] Thank you. We didn’t know that that would happen and so that is a great surprise with this project. [Sina] Dennis, how are we doing on time? [Dennis] Well, I was going to ask you. Because you guys have had an unbelievably long day. So, when you guys are ready to raise the white flag, let us know, but did you have a question earlier? I’m sorry … I’m sorry, I’m awful with names. [May] I’m glad that you actually said that you’re incorporating other … you know, the general population not just for screen readers, because most times, when people think of accessibility, if it meets screen reader needs, then it is accessible. Not true. I actually had a discussion slash argument with a former president of the National Federation of the Blind and that was his concept; if you can interact with it with a screen reader, then it’s fully accessible. Not true. So they miss a lot of things, so I’d like to know what other accessibility features or functions that you incorporated into the website, beyond the descriptions and … ? [Sina] Yeah, so two things. The first is that if you look at WCAG, there’s four foundational principles there. Perceivable, Operable, Understandable and Robust. The P.O.U.R. principles. And there are a lot of different groups or users that you can encompass with a lot of the things there. So for example, color contrast is very important, low vision is an incredibly large population. Keyboard ability, for those who can’t use a mouse. So I’m not talking screen readers here, just regular keyboard ability, and intelligent keyboard It doesn’t just mean that you can tab to everything, because we have, what, ten thousand? Is that right? Ten thousand images. Sometimes there are page, there’s pagination in the system, sometimes you might have a thousand links on a page or something like that. So intelligent keyboard ability really thinking about that process. With respect to cognitive, we’ve done a little bit of work on the back end, with respect to just … the amount of words on the screen. Something we’re struggling a little bit is, do we truncate and then do we have “more” buttons? There’s empathetical use cases there, right? Or at least traditionally … use cases. For example, if you have a “more” button, what do you do for blind users? And there are a couple of tricks. I’m not going to bore you with the details. But, there are things you can do to make it easier for narrow vision, narrow field of view, for low vision, also, folks who are on, cognitive impairment spectrum, where you might want less text on the screen, but then also not to force more keyboard strokes, not only for the sighted keyboard user, but also for the blind user. Let’s see here, what else. We’ve done a little bit of thinking around this idea that if you are a … keyboard, but mainly I’m thinking of switch users so, things like skip to content links but also scroll back up, so jump links in the middle of the page, especially with pagination, something that I’ve been struggling with a little bit, because it’s a hard one. Again, going back to this idea of having it be just as good for keyboard users, just a good for screen reader users. The way I tend to look at it is, it’s an ever increasing net I think I was saying this earlier today, it’s an ever increasing net. The tricky thing is, every time you want to add, fail forward.
Failing, awesome. Iterating, great. Fail forward. But, make sure that when you do that, you do a check, you circle back and you say “Did we do something that took away from another user group that we were doing really well with and that doesn’t always mean just aligning with WCAG. WCAG is awesome, and a lot of people that worked on it. I’ve gone out preaching it and using it all the time. But it’s not the end all, be all. There’s plenty of great principles, sometimes that are encapsulated there that you can also take advantage of. Does that answer your question? [May] Um, yes, follow-up comment. Because you can actually take away from one challenge by trying to address another. So, color contrast is something that you mentioned which actually is a challenge for a lot of people, because they don’t use enough contrast. And so therefore you can’t distinguish foreground from background, text from the background. However, then some people take it to the extreme they say, we’ll just make it pure black text on pure white background. Now you’ve lost a lot of people that have certain cognitive challenges such as dyslexia. In that aspect, people just decide ok, we’ll make it the maximum. Well now you’ve made it more challenging for another group. [Sina] So, I think we’ve been pretty lucky here not to have … so I’m very well acquainted with the polarizing scenario that you are laying out, because I’ve had to deal with that a lot. It’s the “Oh wow, this is going to be great. Let’s just totally go to the black and white.” “That’s what we are going to do. Fine. We’re going to have no…” We’re lucky here not to have that sort of attitude about things. But I kind of want to address your overall point. Often times, and this is totally, I’m not stating this as a well, researched principle. But it’s my opinion, so take it for what it’s worth. The answer to a cross roads of multiple usability features, in which one is orthogonal to the other, is sometimes resolved at least by offering the user customizability that is stateful. And so what that means is that if you have a website in which the color contrast can be monochromatic or color and let’s just, for the sake of argument say 4.5:1. It’s just not that hard to actually make the few lines of CSS change and store them a radio button choice. That get stored for that user as a cookie. And, those are the kinds of things that, I feel, address some of those kind of things and take it out of the realm of “Oh, this is impossible” into, customizability, some basic usability, then the ability to always, if you have that choice, giving the user, this goes back to the seven principles of universal design, giving the user a way, a very easy way of returning back to the original starting point. So if they don’t like that thing, or maybe, one day they need it to be black and white, but another day, a lot of folks with vision impairment will tell you, their vision is not constant from day to day. Sometimes they, I have some friends who use a screen reader only for some days. And on other days, they use large type. And that’s ok. So, having those choices be user modifiable I feel is an important way of solving that problem. Or at least, a stab at solving the problem. [Susan] We have a ton of users, if anyone has actually looked at our site, who would love to be able to customize by turning off the grid. [Sina] Yes. [Susan] And, someday we’ll convince our developer. [Anna] And actually, that tees up a second side to this, we’re operating within a design that was already created [Dennis] That sounds familiar. [Laughter] [Anna] So there were … [Susan] But it really, really, rather aggressive … [Anna] Very rigid, very rigid, and so that was one of the things, I remember Susan saying in the beginning was if we’re going to carry this, we have to go even beyond, because this site looks the way it does and is going to look the way it does, and our font is the way it is and … [Laughter] [Sina] There were certain things that were invariable. You always have those in projects. And that’s just the reality, but again I feel customization can help that after the fact. [Susan] But, just the work that our developers have done, and our designer had done, our developer, designer team, have made them more sensitive, even to the front-facing [Sina] Agreed. [Susan] design aspects. [Elizabeth] Have you done any usability testing with people yet? [Sina] Yes. So, low vision, cognitive, keyboard-only but sighted, fully blind, I think I’m missing two … hard of hearing with captions and there are a couple other things, there’s not too much sound other than the video contents, those were somewhat straight forward I’m missing one [Susan] … [Sina] And along the WCAG functional criteria docs was the overall basis for that with a few usability things thrown in. And that was … oh, cross-functional, that is what I was missing so, we had folks, evaluate this website, I’m going to totally misplace this, a few different states in the United States, Ireland, London, some folks up in Toronto, Vancouver, um … … it’s been a really long day, and a couple of other places as well, and that helps a lot as well because you’ll pick up on some things where accessibility and internationalization come into play and those are things to be aware of. Even if it’s simple things, like having to display time and making sure that is marked up correctly to the browser, to display it, this is a time field, this is a date field, other things like that, that have back end implications as well. [Elizabeth] Ok, thank you. [Dennis] Well, I’m going to be the mean one and say, that is … [Sina] You’re so mean. [Dennis] … yeah, I know. Well, that’s the worst thing I’ve been called today, so … I want to thank Susan, Sina and Anna for their time today and for sharing their experiences with the website. I think they all deserve a big round of applause. [Applause] [Dennis] Thank you so very much. The only thing I will add to this, which is totally unrelated to this is when you get home or whenever you feel like it, please go back to the meetup site for this, please rate it and please provide feedback, you know, was this helpful, was it not, was it missing something. [Susan] Well, don’t rate us if it wasn’t helpful. [Laughter] More from the meetup side rather than the content side. Thank you so very much. [Susan, Sina & Anna] Thank you. [Applause]