Dear all,
you may like to check Get Full Text Research (GetFTR) - https://www.getfulltextresearch.com/
It seems that American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Taylor & Francis and Wiley are going to rollout Seamless access sign in button and WAYF soon. Springer Nature already implemented it at Nature.com platform.
Would you like to share comment on that, Chris? :-)
Best regards
Jiri
Hi Jiri,
You’ve read my mind! I dropped a note to Jos earlier today suggesting we have a FIM4L call where we can see a demo of the GetFTR service, see how it builds on SeamlessAccess, and discuss any concerns.
-Heather
On Dec 4, 2019, at 3:15 PM, Jiri Pavlik jiri.pavlik@mzk.cz wrote:
Dear all,
you may like to check Get Full Text Research (GetFTR) - https://www.getfulltextresearch.com/
It seems that American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Taylor & Francis and Wiley are going to rollout Seamless access sign in button and WAYF soon. Springer Nature already implemented it at Nature.com platform.
Would you like to share comment on that, Chris? :-)
Best regards
Jiri
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
Hi Heather,
great, looking forward to the call.
Cheers
Jiri
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 4:24 PM Heather Flanagan hlf@sphericalcowconsulting.com wrote:
Hi Jiri,
You’ve read my mind! I dropped a note to Jos earlier today suggesting we have a FIM4L call where we can see a demo of the GetFTR service, see how it builds on SeamlessAccess, and discuss any concerns.
-Heather
On Dec 4, 2019, at 3:15 PM, Jiri Pavlik jiri.pavlik@mzk.cz wrote:
Dear all,
you may like to check Get Full Text Research (GetFTR) - https://www.getfulltextresearch.com/
It seems that American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Taylor & Francis and Wiley are going to rollout Seamless access sign in button and WAYF soon. Springer Nature already implemented it at Nature.com platform.
Would you like to share comment on that, Chris? :-)
Best regards
Jiri
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
Riger Schonfeld has a great piece on this in SK yesterday .... https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/12/03/publishers-announce-plug-leak...
I'd love to see a demo. Its hard to conceptualize from just text!
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019, 9:15 AM Jiri Pavlik jiri.pavlik@mzk.cz wrote:
Dear all,
you may like to check Get Full Text Research (GetFTR) - https://www.getfulltextresearch.com/
It seems that American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Taylor & Francis and Wiley are going to rollout Seamless access sign in button and WAYF soon. Springer Nature already implemented it at Nature.com platform.
Would you like to share comment on that, Chris? :-)
Best regards
Jiri
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
Using just the entitlement information from the publishers' websites isn't sufficient, since many full texts are licensed on other platforms, especially aggregators like EBSCO or ProQuest. So unless aggregators take part (which seems very unlikely for EBSCO and ProQuest since they have their own discovery platforms) or link resolvers are integrated, users won't have access to large parts of the licensed content via GetFTR. Google Scholar covers lots of publishers, also provides access to free versions and integrates link resolvers, so I'm wondering why users should switch from Google Scholar (or a discovery tool provided by the library) to GetFTR?
Best regards, Bernd
On 04.12.19 16:51, Lisa Hinchliffe wrote:
Riger Schonfeld has a great piece on this in SK yesterday .... https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/12/03/publishers-announce-plug-leak...
I'd love to see a demo. Its hard to conceptualize from just text!
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019, 9:15 AM Jiri Pavlik jiri.pavlik@mzk.cz wrote:
Dear all,
you may like to check Get Full Text Research (GetFTR) - https://www.getfulltextresearch.com/
It seems that American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Taylor & Francis and Wiley are going to rollout Seamless access sign in button and WAYF soon. Springer Nature already implemented it at Nature.com platform.
Would you like to share comment on that, Chris? :-)
Best regards
Jiri
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
As I understand it, GetFTR is not a user facing tool. A user won't have any control over whether there are GFTR links in the tool they are using any more than they control any other aspects of what an interface presents to them. From what I read, any discovery layer (what GFTR is calling a technology integration partner) will eventually be able to turn on GFTR links using the APIs. So, beyond Dimensions, Mendeley, etc. in the early pilot, GFTR links could eventually appear in Google Scholar (if Google wanted them to), in library subscribed databases (beyond Dimensions), in A&I services, in citation management tools, on ResearchGate, etc.
The issue of aggregator content and GFTR is not whether the aggregators might turn on GFTR links (which they may) but that aggregator hosted content is currently not able to be a target for a GFTR link. So, if the library doesn't have the content from the publisher directly, the GFTR link will convey to the user that the library does not have it ... even if it does on an aggregator. Some of us suspect that while libraries will see this as a flaw in GFTR, the publishers will see this as a feature and so this "limitation" (to use Roger's term in the SK post) is likely to persist.
Lisa
___
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 3:58 PM Bernd Oberknapp bo@ub.uni-freiburg.de wrote:
Using just the entitlement information from the publishers' websites isn't sufficient, since many full texts are licensed on other platforms, especially aggregators like EBSCO or ProQuest. So unless aggregators take part (which seems very unlikely for EBSCO and ProQuest since they have their own discovery platforms) or link resolvers are integrated, users won't have access to large parts of the licensed content via GetFTR. Google Scholar covers lots of publishers, also provides access to free versions and integrates link resolvers, so I'm wondering why users should switch from Google Scholar (or a discovery tool provided by the library) to GetFTR?
Best regards, Bernd
On 04.12.19 16:51, Lisa Hinchliffe wrote:
Riger Schonfeld has a great piece on this in SK yesterday ....
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/12/03/publishers-announce-plug-leak...
I'd love to see a demo. Its hard to conceptualize from just text!
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019, 9:15 AM Jiri Pavlik jiri.pavlik@mzk.cz wrote:
Dear all,
you may like to check Get Full Text Research (GetFTR) - https://www.getfulltextresearch.com/
It seems that American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Taylor & Francis and Wiley are going to rollout Seamless access sign in button and WAYF soon. Springer Nature already implemented it at Nature.com platform.
Would you like to share comment on that, Chris? :-)
Best regards
Jiri
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
-- Bernd Oberknapp Gesamtleitung ReDI
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg Universitätsbibliothek Platz der Universität 2 | Postfach 1629 D-79098 Freiburg | D-79016 Freiburg
Telefon: +49 761 203-3852 Telefax: +49 761 203-3987 E-Mail: bo@ub.uni-freiburg.de Internet: www.ub.uni-freiburg.de
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
On 05.12.19 00:53, Lisa Hinchliffe wrote:
As I understand it, GetFTR is not a user facing tool. A user won't have any control over whether there are GFTR links in the tool they are using any more than they control any other aspects of what an interface presents to them. From what I read, any discovery layer (what GFTR is calling a technology integration partner) will eventually be able to turn on GFTR links using the APIs. So, beyond Dimensions, Mendeley, etc. in the early pilot, GFTR links could eventually appear in Google Scholar (if Google wanted them to), in library subscribed databases (beyond Dimensions), in A&I services, in citation management tools, on ResearchGate, etc.
I obviously misunderstood what the service does from the information on the website...
The issue of aggregator content and GFTR is not whether the aggregators might turn on GFTR links (which they may) but that aggregator hosted content is currently not able to be a target for a GFTR link. So, if the library doesn't have the content from the publisher directly, the GFTR link will convey to the user that the library does not have it ... even if it does on an aggregator. Some of us suspect that while libraries will see this as a flaw in GFTR, the publishers will see this as a feature and so this "limitation" (to use Roger's term in the SK post) is likely to persist.
I think the question is whether platforms that could integrate GetFTR would regard this as a flaw, and if so, if they would accept this because it is easier to implement than link resolver based techniques which have been available for a long time but haven't been used widely. I don't think that platforms that already can make use of the full holdings information for an institution (like Google Scholar when a library takes part in the library links program) would replace this with GetFTR, since this would make their service less attractive. Maybe they would offer GetFTR as an additional option for institutions that don't make their holdings available.
I'm wondering if GetFTR actually has an advantage regarding the seamless acess? For example why shouldn't the access work as seamlessly from Google Scholar or a library discovery service, even if GetFTR isn't used?
Best regards, Bernd
I do see some other flaws:
* If I understand this well, it will only work for publications that have a doi. Unfortunately that is not the case for every e-publication, and not every discovery layer has got the doi for each publication in its meta data * It only works for publishers and integrators that support federated authentication and will join the common GFTR environment. Harder to implement for small publishers * It only seems to work in discovery layers that themselves support Federated authentication, since they have tp provide the user affiliation to the GFTR API’s. I do not think that Google Scholar will give up authenticating by google over authenticating by distributed Identity providers. * Will it be easy to join the GFTR environment ? Not only for aggregators and small publishers but also for libraries to for example offer links to content in their repositories for example
Peter
Drs. P.J.C. van Boheemen MDT Library FB – Information Technology Wageningen University & Research tel. +31 317 48 25 17 FORUM, building 102 Droevendaalseseteeg 2, 6708 PB, Wageningen [cid:image001.png@01D3315D.FE77CCE0]
From: FIM4L fim4l-bounces@lists.daasi.de On Behalf Of Lisa Hinchliffe Sent: donderdag 5 december 2019 12:53 To: Bernd Oberknapp bo@ub.uni-freiburg.de Cc: fim4l@lists.daasi.de Subject: Re: [Fim4l] Fwd: GetFTR
As I understand it, GetFTR is not a user facing tool. A user won't have any control over whether there are GFTR links in the tool they are using any more than they control any other aspects of what an interface presents to them. From what I read, any discovery layer (what GFTR is calling a technology integration partner) will eventually be able to turn on GFTR links using the APIs. So, beyond Dimensions, Mendeley, etc. in the early pilot, GFTR links could eventually appear in Google Scholar (if Google wanted them to), in library subscribed databases (beyond Dimensions), in A&I services, in citation management tools, on ResearchGate, etc.
The issue of aggregator content and GFTR is not whether the aggregators might turn on GFTR links (which they may) but that aggregator hosted content is currently not able to be a target for a GFTR link. So, if the library doesn't have the content from the publisher directly, the GFTR link will convey to the user that the library does not have it ... even if it does on an aggregator. Some of us suspect that while libraries will see this as a flaw in GFTR, the publishers will see this as a feature and so this "limitation" (to use Roger's term in the SK post) is likely to persist.
Lisa
___
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.commailto:lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 3:58 PM Bernd Oberknapp <bo@ub.uni-freiburg.demailto:bo@ub.uni-freiburg.de> wrote: Using just the entitlement information from the publishers' websites isn't sufficient, since many full texts are licensed on other platforms, especially aggregators like EBSCO or ProQuest. So unless aggregators take part (which seems very unlikely for EBSCO and ProQuest since they have their own discovery platforms) or link resolvers are integrated, users won't have access to large parts of the licensed content via GetFTR. Google Scholar covers lots of publishers, also provides access to free versions and integrates link resolvers, so I'm wondering why users should switch from Google Scholar (or a discovery tool provided by the library) to GetFTR?
Best regards, Bernd
On 04.12.19 16:51, Lisa Hinchliffe wrote:
Riger Schonfeld has a great piece on this in SK yesterday .... https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/12/03/publishers-announce-plug-leak...
I'd love to see a demo. Its hard to conceptualize from just text!
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.commailto:lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019, 9:15 AM Jiri Pavlik <jiri.pavlik@mzk.czmailto:jiri.pavlik@mzk.cz> wrote:
Dear all,
you may like to check Get Full Text Research (GetFTR) - https://www.getfulltextresearch.com/
It seems that American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Taylor & Francis and Wiley are going to rollout Seamless access sign in button and WAYF soon. Springer Nature already implemented it at Nature.com platform.
Would you like to share comment on that, Chris? :-)
Best regards
Jiri
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.demailto:FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.demailto:FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
-- Bernd Oberknapp Gesamtleitung ReDI
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg Universitätsbibliothek Platz der Universität 2 | Postfach 1629 D-79098 Freiburg | D-79016 Freiburg
Telefon: +49 761 203-3852 Telefax: +49 761 203-3987 E-Mail: bo@ub.uni-freiburg.demailto:bo@ub.uni-freiburg.de Internet: www.ub.uni-freiburg.dehttp://www.ub.uni-freiburg.de
_______________________________________________ FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.demailto:FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
Hi all,
I did a post on The Scholarly Kitchen about librarian concerns and GetFTR ( https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/12/10/why-are-librarians-concerned-... ). The leadership of GetFTR has engaged and posted some additional information that is very clarifying and also seems to show that they are already iterating based on the discussions they are seeing - which is great. So, in this case, read the comments!
Best, Lisa
___
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 3:37 AM Boheemen, Peter van peter.vanboheemen@wur.nl wrote:
I do see some other flaws:
- If I understand this well, it will only work for publications that
have a doi. Unfortunately that is not the case for every e-publication, and not every discovery layer has got the doi for each publication in its meta data
- It only works for publishers and integrators that support federated
authentication and will join the common GFTR environment. Harder to implement for small publishers
- It only seems to work in discovery layers that themselves support
Federated authentication, since they have tp provide the user affiliation to the GFTR API’s. I do not think that Google Scholar will give up authenticating by google over authenticating by distributed Identity providers.
- Will it be easy to join the GFTR environment ? Not only for
aggregators and small publishers but also for libraries to for example offer links to content in their repositories for example
Peter
Drs. P.J.C. van Boheemen MDT Library FB – Information Technology Wageningen University & Research tel. +31 317 48 25 17 FORUM, building 102 Droevendaalseseteeg 2, 6708 PB, Wageningen [image: cid:image001.png@01D3315D.FE77CCE0]*From:* FIM4L fim4l-bounces@lists.daasi.de *On Behalf Of *Lisa Hinchliffe *Sent:* donderdag 5 december 2019 12:53 *To:* Bernd Oberknapp bo@ub.uni-freiburg.de *Cc:* fim4l@lists.daasi.de *Subject:* Re: [Fim4l] Fwd: GetFTR
As I understand it, GetFTR is not a user facing tool. A user won't have any control over whether there are GFTR links in the tool they are using any more than they control any other aspects of what an interface presents to them. From what I read, any discovery layer (what GFTR is calling a technology integration partner) will eventually be able to turn on GFTR links using the APIs. So, beyond Dimensions, Mendeley, etc. in the early pilot, GFTR links could eventually appear in Google Scholar (if Google wanted them to), in library subscribed databases (beyond Dimensions), in A&I services, in citation management tools, on ResearchGate, etc.
The issue of aggregator content and GFTR is not whether the aggregators might turn on GFTR links (which they may) but that aggregator hosted content is currently not able to be a target for a GFTR link. So, if the library doesn't have the content from the publisher directly, the GFTR link will convey to the user that the library does not have it ... even if it does on an aggregator. Some of us suspect that while libraries will see this as a flaw in GFTR, the publishers will see this as a feature and so this "limitation" (to use Roger's term in the SK post) is likely to persist.
Lisa
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 3:58 PM Bernd Oberknapp bo@ub.uni-freiburg.de wrote:
Using just the entitlement information from the publishers' websites isn't sufficient, since many full texts are licensed on other platforms, especially aggregators like EBSCO or ProQuest. So unless aggregators take part (which seems very unlikely for EBSCO and ProQuest since they have their own discovery platforms) or link resolvers are integrated, users won't have access to large parts of the licensed content via GetFTR. Google Scholar covers lots of publishers, also provides access to free versions and integrates link resolvers, so I'm wondering why users should switch from Google Scholar (or a discovery tool provided by the library) to GetFTR?
Best regards, Bernd
On 04.12.19 16:51, Lisa Hinchliffe wrote:
Riger Schonfeld has a great piece on this in SK yesterday ....
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/12/03/publishers-announce-plug-leak...
I'd love to see a demo. Its hard to conceptualize from just text!
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019, 9:15 AM Jiri Pavlik jiri.pavlik@mzk.cz wrote:
Dear all,
you may like to check Get Full Text Research (GetFTR) - https://www.getfulltextresearch.com/
It seems that American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Taylor & Francis and Wiley are going to rollout Seamless access sign in button and WAYF soon. Springer Nature already implemented it at Nature.com platform.
Would you like to share comment on that, Chris? :-)
Best regards
Jiri
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
-- Bernd Oberknapp Gesamtleitung ReDI
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg Universitätsbibliothek Platz der Universität 2 | Postfach 1629 D-79098 Freiburg | D-79016 Freiburg
Telefon: +49 761 203-3852 Telefax: +49 761 203-3987 E-Mail: bo@ub.uni-freiburg.de Internet: www.ub.uni-freiburg.de
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
+1
Jiri
On Wed, 11 Dec 2019 at 21:42, Lisa Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.com wrote:
Hi all,
I did a post on The Scholarly Kitchen about librarian concerns and GetFTR ( https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/12/10/why-are-librarians-concerned-... ). The leadership of GetFTR has engaged and posted some additional information that is very clarifying and also seems to show that they are already iterating based on the discussions they are seeing - which is great. So, in this case, read the comments!
Best, Lisa
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Thu, Dec 5, 2019 at 3:37 AM Boheemen, Peter van < peter.vanboheemen@wur.nl> wrote:
I do see some other flaws:
- If I understand this well, it will only work for publications that
have a doi. Unfortunately that is not the case for every e-publication, and not every discovery layer has got the doi for each publication in its meta data
- It only works for publishers and integrators that support federated
authentication and will join the common GFTR environment. Harder to implement for small publishers
- It only seems to work in discovery layers that themselves support
Federated authentication, since they have tp provide the user affiliation to the GFTR API’s. I do not think that Google Scholar will give up authenticating by google over authenticating by distributed Identity providers.
- Will it be easy to join the GFTR environment ? Not only for
aggregators and small publishers but also for libraries to for example offer links to content in their repositories for example
Peter
Drs. P.J.C. van Boheemen MDT Library FB – Information Technology Wageningen University & Research tel. +31 317 48 25 17 FORUM, building 102 Droevendaalseseteeg 2, 6708 PB, Wageningen [image: cid:image001.png@01D3315D.FE77CCE0]*From:* FIM4L fim4l-bounces@lists.daasi.de *On Behalf Of *Lisa Hinchliffe *Sent:* donderdag 5 december 2019 12:53 *To:* Bernd Oberknapp bo@ub.uni-freiburg.de *Cc:* fim4l@lists.daasi.de *Subject:* Re: [Fim4l] Fwd: GetFTR
As I understand it, GetFTR is not a user facing tool. A user won't have any control over whether there are GFTR links in the tool they are using any more than they control any other aspects of what an interface presents to them. From what I read, any discovery layer (what GFTR is calling a technology integration partner) will eventually be able to turn on GFTR links using the APIs. So, beyond Dimensions, Mendeley, etc. in the early pilot, GFTR links could eventually appear in Google Scholar (if Google wanted them to), in library subscribed databases (beyond Dimensions), in A&I services, in citation management tools, on ResearchGate, etc.
The issue of aggregator content and GFTR is not whether the aggregators might turn on GFTR links (which they may) but that aggregator hosted content is currently not able to be a target for a GFTR link. So, if the library doesn't have the content from the publisher directly, the GFTR link will convey to the user that the library does not have it ... even if it does on an aggregator. Some of us suspect that while libraries will see this as a flaw in GFTR, the publishers will see this as a feature and so this "limitation" (to use Roger's term in the SK post) is likely to persist.
Lisa
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019 at 3:58 PM Bernd Oberknapp bo@ub.uni-freiburg.de wrote:
Using just the entitlement information from the publishers' websites isn't sufficient, since many full texts are licensed on other platforms, especially aggregators like EBSCO or ProQuest. So unless aggregators take part (which seems very unlikely for EBSCO and ProQuest since they have their own discovery platforms) or link resolvers are integrated, users won't have access to large parts of the licensed content via GetFTR. Google Scholar covers lots of publishers, also provides access to free versions and integrates link resolvers, so I'm wondering why users should switch from Google Scholar (or a discovery tool provided by the library) to GetFTR?
Best regards, Bernd
On 04.12.19 16:51, Lisa Hinchliffe wrote:
Riger Schonfeld has a great piece on this in SK yesterday ....
https://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2019/12/03/publishers-announce-plug-leak...
I'd love to see a demo. Its hard to conceptualize from just text!
Lisa Janicke Hinchliffe lisalibrarian@gmail.com
On Wed, Dec 4, 2019, 9:15 AM Jiri Pavlik jiri.pavlik@mzk.cz wrote:
Dear all,
you may like to check Get Full Text Research (GetFTR) - https://www.getfulltextresearch.com/
It seems that American Chemical Society, Elsevier, Taylor & Francis and Wiley are going to rollout Seamless access sign in button and WAYF soon. Springer Nature already implemented it at Nature.com platform.
Would you like to share comment on that, Chris? :-)
Best regards
Jiri
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
-- Bernd Oberknapp Gesamtleitung ReDI
Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg Universitätsbibliothek Platz der Universität 2 | Postfach 1629 D-79098 Freiburg | D-79016 Freiburg
Telefon: +49 761 203-3852 Telefax: +49 761 203-3987 E-Mail: bo@ub.uni-freiburg.de Internet: www.ub.uni-freiburg.de
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
FIM4L mailing list FIM4L@lists.daasi.de http://lists.daasi.de/listinfo/fim4l
Teilnehmer (6)
-
Bernd Oberknapp -
Boheemen, Peter van -
Heather Flanagan -
Jiri Pavlik -
Jiri Pavlik -
Lisa Hinchliffe