This Global Data Barometer Country profile for the Philippines provides a quick overview of the strengths and weaknesses with regards to data capabilities, governance, availability and impact, and in comparison with other countries in the region and globally. The Philippines scored particularly high in the Governance pillar, due to having a law on data protection and framework on data sharing. In terms of Availability, Philippines scored higher than the global average for public finance, public procurement and political integrity. However, Philippines showed some lacking in terms of Capabilities, especially on open data and civil servants training possibly due to challenges during the pandemic.

This Global Data Barometer Country profile for India provides a quick overview of the strengths and weaknesses with regards to data capabilities, governance, availability and impact, and in comparison with other countries in the region and globally. Among the countries reviewed in South Asia, India scored the highest with strengths recorded in Governance and Capability. With a legal framework for data protection and data management, as well as widespread evidence of civil servants training and open data initiatives even at the sub-national level, India also showed evidence of availability for many datasets assessed. However, there may be lacking in terms of use and impact of the datasets, as well as strengthening the framework on data sharing across sectors.

This Global Data Barometer Country profile for Sri Lanka provides a quick overview of the strengths and weaknesses with regards to data capabilities, governance, availability and impact, and in comparison with other countries in the region and globally. Sri Lanka has a low GDB score in Governance, with no evidence for data sharing, management and protection. There is also little evidence for government support for data reuse and subnational capabilities. However, Sri Lanka does indicate evidence for civil service training and open data initiative, which indicates a willingness to learn and improve.

This Global Data Barometer Country profile for Nepal provides a quick overview of the strengths and weaknesses with regards to data capabilities, governance, availability and impact, and in comparison with other countries in the region and globally. Nepal has comparatively low scores regionally in Governance and Capabilities. Comprehensive frameworks and government support for open data, data sharing, data management are lacking. However, Nepal does have data available for certain issues such as procurement and climate vulnerability, and the collaboration between its Public Procurement Monitoring Office (PPMO) and the Open Contracting Partnership indicates a potential improvement in data disclosure.

This Global Data Barometer Country profile for Bangladesh provides a quick overview of the strengths and weaknesses with regards to data capabilities, governance, availability and impact, and in comparison with other countries in the region and globally. Bangladesh scores lower than the regional average across the GDB pillars, but scores well for open-data initiative and civil service training under Capabilities. From a Governance perspective, the country also has strong data management frameworks and open-data policies. However, Bangladesh does not demonstrate good Use and Impact, with no evidence of using data to influence policy or support due diligence.

This Global Data Barometer Country profile for Taiwan provides a quick overview of the strengths and weaknesses with regards to data capabilities, governance, availability and impact, and in comparison with other countries in the region and globally. Taiwan scores comparatively higher from a regional standpoint for both the Governance and Capabilities pillars as well as numerous sub-indicators. However, Taiwan’s legal frameworks regarding publication of information and lobbying requires improvement, and there is limited proof of impact of data use. Evidence also points to a rural/urban divide in the implementation of an open data environment, and while there is evidence of the desire to train civil servants, as of now there is no evidence of data-related trainings in Taiwan.

This Global Data Barometer Country profile for Indonesia provides a quick overview of the strengths and weaknesses with regards to data capabilities, governance, availability and impact, and in comparison with other countries in the region and globally. Among the pillars, Indonesia had the highest score in Governance, as evidenced by availability of data sharing and data management frameworks, although lacks full force of the law. Nevertheless, the Indonesian government has plans in place for an actual law for data protection. Data availability in Indonesia is also impressive, as compared to other countries in the region. In terms of Capabilities and Use and Impact, Indonesia showed evidence of training of data skills and use cases in multiple organisations, but may not be widespread.

This Global Data Barometer Country profile for Vietnam provides a quick overview of the strengths and weaknesses with regards to data capabilities, governance, availability and impact, and in comparison with other countries in the region and globally. Vietnam showed strengths in the Governance and Capabilities. In particular, a decree was introduced under the law in 2020 that covers data management and sharing, although there is no specific law for data protection. Training for civil servants are also implemented under a national digital transformation programme since 2015. In terms of availability, Vietnam may need to improve on data availability, which will subsequently increase use and impact of open data.

A global measure of how governments are publishing and using open data for accountability, innovation and social impact.

This Global Data Barometer Country profile for India provides a quick overview of the strengths and weaknesses with regards to data capabilities, governance, availability and impact, and in comparison with other countries in the region and globally. Among the countries reviewed in South Asia, India scored the highest with strengths recorded in Governance and Capability. With a legal framework for data protection and data management, as well as widespread evidence of civil servants training and open data initiatives even at the sub-national level, India also showed evidence of availability for many datasets assessed. However, there may be lacking in terms of use and impact of the datasets, as well as strengthening the framework on data sharing across sectors.

The Open Data Barometer aims to uncover the true prevalence and impact of open data initiatives around the world. It analyses global trends, and also ranks countries and regions via an in-depth methodology that considers: readiness to secure the benefits of open data; actual levels of implementation; and the impact of such initiatives.

This is the pilot edition of the Open Data Barometer, and contains data from a global expert survey, along with secondary data.

Full details are provided in the Open Data Barometer 2013 Global Report

This Global Data Barometer Country profile for Thailand provides a quick overview of the strengths and weaknesses with regards to data capabilities, governance, availability and impact, and in comparison with other countries in the region and globally. Thailand has some high capabilities in terms of data matters, such as having accessible civil servants training, data hackathons for data reuse and widespread open data initiatives. In terms of Governance, Thailand faired well in data protection as they have a law, whilst having a framework in data management and a yet-to-be-enforced Digital Government Standard. Thailand could do some improvement in terms of data availability in climate action and company information, as well as improving data quality to enable more use and impact of the data.

This Global Data Barometer Country profile for Cambodia provides a quick overview of the strengths and weaknesses with regards to data capabilities, governance, availability and impact, and in comparison with other countries in the region and globally. Comparing with other lower-middle income countries reviewed, Cambodia scored quite low in the report. Despite this, there is evidence of civil servants training by the National Institute of Statistics that is part of a sustainable strategy plan, as well as a legal framework with force of law in terms of data protection. Cambodia does not show evidence of open data initiative and data management capabilities, although there are datasets on public finance and land data, which is available through NGO websites.

A global measure of how governments are publishing and using open data for accountability, innovation and social impact.

Business Barometer Index: Manufacturing data was reported at 24.420 Index in Apr 2025. This records an increase from the previous number of 19.940 Index for Mar 2025. Business Barometer Index: Manufacturing data is updated monthly, averaging 60.930 Index from Sep 2008 (Median) to Apr 2025, with 200 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 73.940 Index in Feb 2011 and a record low of 19.940 Index in Mar 2025. Business Barometer Index: Manufacturing data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Canadian Federation of Independent Business. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Canada – Table CA.S002: Business Barometer Index. [COVID-19-IMPACT]; Since May-2023 release, the values indicated in the months previous to the publication month may differ slightly from the actual value. These numbers have not been updated to include responses received after the initial cut-off date and the end of the respective month.

Abstract

The Global Barometer Survey represents a systematic comparative survey of attitudes and values toward politics, power, reform, democracy and citizens' political actions in Africa, Asia, Latin America and the Arabic region. It is based on a common module of questions contained in regional barometer surveys.

Cross-national comparative surveys have been implemented in 55 political systems. In each of the 55 countries or regions, a national research team administers a country-wide face-to-face survey using standardized survey instruments to compile the required micro-level data under a common research framework and research methodology.

Geographic coverage

Country-wide survey in 55 political systems -namely Japan, Korea, Mongolia, Philippines, Taiwan, Thailand, Indonesia, Singapore, Vietnam, Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Uruguay, Venezuela, Benin, Botswana, Cape Verde, Ghana, Kenya, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique, Namibia, Nigeria, Senegal, South Africa, Tanzania, Uganda, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, India, Nepal, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Jordan, Palestine, Algeria, Morocco, Kuwait and Lebanon.

Analysis unit

-Individuals

Universe

The survey of Algeria, Argentina, Bolivia, Botswana, Brasil, Cape Verde, Colombia, Costa Rica, Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Ghana, Guatemala, Honduras, India, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, South Korea, Kuwait, Lebanon, Lesotho, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Mozambique, Namibia, Nepal, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Palestine, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Philippines, Senegal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Taiwan, Tanzania, Thailand, Uganda, Uruguay, Venezuela, Vietnam, Zambia, Zimbabwe cover both sexes, 18 and more years. The survey of Indonesia covers both sexes, 17 and more years. And the survey of Singapore covers both sexes, 21 and more years.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Sampling procedure for each individual country is available at http://www.jdsurvey.net/gbs/GBSTechnical.jsp

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

Algeria: Languages: Arabic (with a small number of respondents preferring French)

Indonesia: (1) Questionnaire The definitive language version of the questionnaire is Bahasa Indonesia, which is a translated version from the original questionnaire in English. Then the language translation underwent cognitive pretests to make sure that the messages were conveyed accurately. (2) Pre-Testing and Finalizing the Questionnaire LSI pre-tested the questionnaire on 17 voting-age adults from different socio-economic classes in order to: - Determine the time length of the interview, - Improve the wording of the questions, if necessary, - Eliminate unnecessary questions or add new items, as the case may be, - Test question sequence and identify bases, - Correct and improve translation, - Change open-ended questions into multiple-choice questions, - Find out which items are conceptually vague, - Check accuracy and adequacy of the questionnaire instructions, - Determine whether the focus of the question is clear, and - Identify interviewer’s recording difficulties.

Kuwait: Language: Arabic Lebanon: Language: Arabic Morocco: Language: Arabic Palestine: Language: Arabic

Singapore: (1) Questionnaire The original language of the questionnaire was English and it was translated into Chinese and Malay by qualified translators. Back-translation was done to ensure accuracy. (2) Pre-Testing and Finalizing the Questionnaire Five interviewers were tasked with pre-testing the pilot questionnaire on 20 respondents, with a good spread of respondents in terms of gender, race and age. The pilot test served to achieve the following: - Determine the time length of the interview - Improve the wording of the questions, if necessary - Eliminate unnecessary questions or add new items, as the case may be - Test question sequence and identify bases - Correct and improve translation - Change open-ended questions into multiple-choice questions - Find out which items are conceptually vague - Check accuracy and adequacy of the questionnaire instructions - Determine whether the focus of the question is clear - Identify interviewer's recording difficulties

Vietnam: (1) Questionnaire English version of questionnaire is translated into Vietnamese. The language translation goes through a cognitive pre-test before the actual pretest is undertaken. (2) Pre-Testing and Finalizing the Questionnaire IHS pre-tested the questionnaire on 100 voting-age adults from different socio-economic classes in order to: - Determine the time length of the interview - Improve the wording of the questions, if necessary - Eliminate unnecessary questions or add new items, as the case may be - Test question sequence and identify bases - Correct and improve translation - Change open-ended questions into multiple-choice questions - Find out which items are conceptually vague - Check accuracy and adequacy of the questionnaire instructions - Determine whether the focus of the question is clear - Identify interviewer's recording difficulties

Cleaning operations

Indonesia: (c) Data Processing (1) Office editors conducted final consistency checks on all interviews prior to coding. (2) A data entry computer program verified and checked the consistency of the encoded data before data tables were generated.

Response rate

Benin: Contact rate: 0.89 Cooperation rate: 0.90 Refusal rate: 0.02 Response rate: 0.80

Indonesia: Response Rate. The original sample size was 1,600 respondents. There were 1,440 successful interviews without substitution, and therefore the response rate is 90%. The number of substitutions is 160.

Botswana: Contact rate: 0.91 Cooperation rate: 0.87 Refusal rate: 0.03 Response rate: 0.79

Cape Verde: Contact rate: 0.92 Cooperation rate: 0.78 Refusal rate: 0.11 Response rate: 0.72

Ghana: Contact rate: 0.98 Cooperation rate: 1.00 Refusal rate: 0.00 Response rate: 0.98

Japan: The second wave of the ABS in Japan was conducted between February and March 2007 and yielded 1,067 valid cases from a sample of 2,500 cases yielding a response rate of 42.7%. On both surveys, we used additional sub-sampling which also followed the same two-stage random sampling procedure. The response rate for Japan was lower than it has been on the EAB 2003 (the first wave of the ABS).

Jordan: Response rate in Jordan’s sample was 95%.

Kenya: Contact rate: 0.80 Cooperation rate: 0.75 Refusal rate: 0.07 Response rate: 0.60

South Korea: A total of 3,224 addresses were selected. At 649 addresses, there was no one at home after two callbacks so that the household residents could not be enumerated and a respondent selected. Of the 2,575 households where an individual name could be selected by the birthday method, 32 individuals were not interviewed because they were too old or infirm or absent from the household; 630 refused; and 413 were not completed because of the respondent’s impatience, for which Koreans are notorious. A total of 1,500 interviews were satisfactorily completed, registering a response rate of 58 percent. Of the completed interviews, 20 percent were randomly selected and independently validated.

Lesotho: Contact rate: 0.78 Cooperation rate: 0.85 Refusal rate: 0.02 Response rate: 0.66

Madagascar: Contact rate: 0.77 Cooperation rate: 0.84 Refusal rate: 0.03 Response rate: 0.65

Malawi: Contact rate: 0.91 Cooperation rate: 0.86 Refusal rate: 0.04 Response rate: 0.78

Mozambique: Contact rate: 0.96 Cooperation rate: 0.95 Refusal rate: 0.03 Response rate: 0.91

Namibia: Contact rate: 0.85 Cooperation rate: 0.70 Refusal rate: 0.21 Response rate: 0.60

Nigeria: Contact rate: 0.77 Cooperation rate: 0.78 Refusal rate: 0.10 Response rate: 0.61

Senegal: Contact rate: 0.95 Cooperation rate: 0.90 Refusal rate: 0.07 Response rate: 0.85

Singapore: The original sample size was 1,000 respondents plus another 1,000 as reserve. There were 1,012 successful interviews with 456 cases replaced by the cases in the reserve list, and therefore the response rate is 69.52%.

South Africa: Contact rate: 0.95 Cooperation rate: 0.91 Refusal rate: 0.06 Response rate: 0.87

Tanzania: Contact rate: 0.98 Cooperation rate: 0.98 Refusal rate: 0.00 Response rate: 0.96

Zambia: Contact rate: 0.86 Cooperation rate: 0.83 Refusal rate: 0.07 Response rate: 0.72

Zimbabwe: Contact rate: 0.82 Cooperation rate: 0.80 Refusal rate: 0.09 Response rate: 0.66

Sampling error estimates

Argentina: Estimated Error: 3% Benin: Estimated Error: +/- 3% with 95% confidence level Bolivia: Estimated Error: 2.8% Botswana: Estimated Error: +/- 3% with 95% confidence level. Brasil: Estimated Error: 2.8% Cape Verde: Estimated Error: +/- 3% with 95% confidence level. Colombia: Estimated Error: 3% Costa Rica: Estimated Error: 3.1% Chile: Estimated Error: 3% Ecuador: Estimated Error: 2.8% El Salvador: Estimated Error: 3.1% Ghana: Estimated Error: +/- 3% with 95% confidence level. Guatemala: Estimated Error: 3.1% Honduras: Estimated Error: 3.1%

Indonesia: Estimated Error: ± 2.5 % Sample Sizes and Error Margins. An indicator of data quality is the standard error of the estimate, on which the margin for sampling error is based. As survey statistics are mostly proportions, the key measure of data precision is the standard error of a proportion taken from a sample. It is computed as follows: ± Z vp(1-p)/n Where Z, at a 95% confidence level is 1.96, p is the sample proportion estimate, and n is the sample size. The overall sample size of

Business Barometer Index: 3-Mth Short-Term: Prince Edward Island data was reported at 41.670 Index in Apr 2025. This records an increase from the previous number of 25.000 Index for Mar 2025. Business Barometer Index: 3-Mth Short-Term: Prince Edward Island data is updated monthly, averaging 54.920 Index from Feb 2009 (Median) to Apr 2025, with 195 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 67.160 Index in Dec 2016 and a record low of 18.750 Index in Apr 2020. Business Barometer Index: 3-Mth Short-Term: Prince Edward Island data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Canadian Federation of Independent Business. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Canada – Table CA.S002: Business Barometer Index. Since May-2023 release, the values indicated in the months previous to the publication month may differ slightly from the actual value. These numbers have not been updated to include responses received after the initial cut-off date and the end of the respective month.

Digital Barometer Market Outlook

The global digital barometer market size in 2023 is estimated at approximately USD 1.8 billion, with projections suggesting it could reach USD 3.2 billion by 2032, growing at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 6.5% over the forecast period. This expansion is primarily driven by the increasing demand for precision in atmospheric pressure measurement, bolstered by technological advancements in sensor technologies. The push towards greater accuracy and reliability in weather forecasting, coupled with the integration of digital barometric sensors in consumer electronics, is significantly contributing to the market's robust growth.

One of the key growth factors for the digital barometer market is the burgeoning demand for accurate weather forecasting. As climate change leads to more unpredictable weather patterns, governments and organizations are investing heavily in advanced meteorological equipment to better predict and mitigate the impact of adverse weather conditions. Digital barometers, with their enhanced sensitivity and precision, are becoming indispensable tools in this domain. Additionally, the increased frequency of extreme weather events has heightened the need for accurate forecasting tools, further driving the demand for digital barometers in both governmental and private meteorological stations.

Another significant factor propelling the market is the integration of digital barometers in consumer electronics, particularly in smartphones and wearable devices. These devices leverage barometric pressure sensors not only for weather forecasting but also for determining altitude, which is crucial for applications such as maps and fitness tracking. With the continuous advancement in mobile technology and the growing consumer inclination towards smart devices, the demand for digital barometers within this segment is expected to soar. The development of Internet of Things (IoT) and smart home systems also opens new avenues for market growth, as these systems often incorporate environmental sensors, including barometers, to enhance automation and efficiency.

The industrial sector also plays a pivotal role in driving market growth. Industries such as aviation, marine, and automotive rely heavily on precise pressure measurements for operational safety and efficiency. Digital barometers provide vital data that is used in navigation systems and for maintaining optimal performance of machinery and equipment. As industrial automation becomes more prevalent, the necessity for reliable pressure measurement tools intensifies, thereby boosting the demand for digital barometers. Furthermore, ongoing advancements in sensor technology, such as Microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), capacitive, and piezoresistive sensors, are enhancing the functionality and application range of digital barometers in industrial settings.

Regionally, North America currently dominates the digital barometer market, primarily due to the high adoption rate of advanced technologies and the presence of major market players. However, significant growth is anticipated in the Asia Pacific region, driven by rapid industrialization and increasing investments in infrastructure development. Emerging economies in this region are experiencing a surge in demand for accurate weather forecasting tools and consumer electronics equipped with digital barometers, thereby presenting lucrative opportunities for market expansion. Meanwhile, Europe continues to be a substantial market, with its focus on climate research and environmental monitoring.

Product Type Analysis

The digital barometer market is categorized into several product types, including handheld, desktop, and wall-mounted barometers. Handheld digital barometers are gaining popularity due to their portability and ease of use. These devices are particularly favored by outdoor enthusiasts, meteorologists, and researchers who require mobile solutions for fieldwork. Handheld barometers are typically equipped with advanced features such as wireless connectivity and data logging capabilities, which enable users to collect and analyze atmospheric pressure data effectively. The growing trend of outdoor recreational activities and the increasing need for portable weather monitoring devices are expected to fuel the demand for handheld digital barometers.

Desktop digital barometers, on the other hand, find extensive applications in professional and industrial settings. These devices offer superior accuracy and are equipped with advanced functionalities, making them suitable for comprehensive atmospheric data analysis. Desktop

Canada Business Barometer Index: Transportation data was reported at 28.230 Index in Apr 2025. This records an increase from the previous number of 21.880 Index for Mar 2025. Canada Business Barometer Index: Transportation data is updated monthly, averaging 57.260 Index from Sep 2008 (Median) to Apr 2025, with 200 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 69.850 Index in Jul 2021 and a record low of 21.880 Index in Mar 2025. Canada Business Barometer Index: Transportation data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Canadian Federation of Independent Business. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Canada – Table CA.S002: Business Barometer Index. Since May-2023 release, the values indicated in the months previous to the publication month may differ slightly from the actual value. These numbers have not been updated to include responses received after the initial cut-off date and the end of the respective month.

This dataset contains data collected during a study "Identifying patterns and recommendations of and for sustainable open data initiatives: a benchmarking-driven analysis of open government data initiatives among European countries" conducted by Martin Lnenicka (University of Pardubice, Pardubice, Czech Republic), Anastasija Nikiforova (University of Tartu, Tartu, Estonia), Mariusz Luterek (University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland), Petar Milic (University of Pristina - Kosovska Mitrovica, Kosovska Mitrovica, Serbia), Daniel Rudmark (University of Gothenburg and RISE Research Institutes of Sweden, Gothenburg, Sweden), Sebastian Neumaier (St. Pölten University of Applied Sciences, Austria), Caterina Santoro (KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium), Cesar Casiano Flores (University of Twente, Twente, the Netherlands), Marijn Janssen (Delft University of Technology, Delft, the Netherlands), Manuel Pedro Rodríguez Bolívar (University of Granada, Granada, Spain).

It is being made public both to act as supplementary data for "Identifying patterns and recommendations of and for sustainable open data initiatives: a benchmarking-driven analysis of open government data initiatives among European countries", Government Information Quarterly*, and in order for other researchers to use these data in their own work.

Methodology

The paper focuses on benchmarking of open data initiatives over the years and attempts to identify patterns observed among European countries that could lead to disparities in the development, growth, and sustainability of open data ecosystems.

This study examines existing benchmarks, indices, and rankings of open (government) data initiatives to find the contexts by which these initiatives are shaped, both of which then outline a protocol to determine the patterns. The composite benchmarks-driven analytical protocol is used as an instrument to examine the understanding, effects, and expert opinions concerning the development patterns and current state of open data ecosystems implemented in eight European countries - Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy, Latvia, Poland, Serbia, Sweden. 3-round Delphi method is applied to identify, reach a consensus, and validate the observed development patterns and their effects that could lead to disparities and divides. Specifically, this study conducts a comparative analysis of different patterns of open (government) data initiatives and their effects in the eight selected countries using six open data benchmarks, two e-government reports (57 editions in total), and other relevant resources, covering the period of 2013–2022.

Description of the data in this data set

The file "OpenDataIndex_2013_2022" collects an overview of 27 editions of 6 open data indices - for all countries they cover, providing respective ranks and values for these countries. These indices are:

1) Global Open Data Index (GODI) (4 editions)

2) Open Data Maturity Report (ODMR) (8 editions)

3) Open Data Inventory (ODIN) (6 editions)

4) Open Data Barometer (ODB) (5 editions)

5) Open, Useful and Re-usable data (OURdata) Index (3 editions)

6) Open Government Development Index (OGDI) (2 editions)

These data shapes the third context - open data indices and rankings. The second sheet of this file covers countries covered by this study, namely, Austria, Belgium, Czech Republic, Italy, Latvia, Poland, Serbia, Sweden. It serves the basis for Section 4.2 of the paper.

Based on the analysis of selected countries, incl. the analysis of their specifics and performance over the years in the indices and benchmarks, covering 57 editions of OGD-oriented reports and indices and e-government-related reports (2013-2022) that shaped a protocol (see paper, Annex 1), 102 patterns that may lead to disparities and divides in the development and benchmarking of ODEs were identified, which after the assessment by expert panel were reduced to a final number of 94 patterns representing four contexts, from which the recommendations defined in the paper were obtained. These patterns are available in the file "OGDdevelopmentPatterns". The first sheet contains the list of patterns, while the second sheet - the list of patterns and their effect as assessed by expert panel.

Format of the file.xls, .csv (for the first spreadsheet only)

Licenses or restrictionsCC-BY

For more info, see README.txt