 I'm not sure how much I should repeat of that. I'll just say that the open group is many more things than just Togaaf and UNIX. I'll talk to you about two of them this morning or this afternoon, rather. Also I had mentioned that we have recently, within the past 12 months, started an airline reference architecture workgroup, Lufthansa and Capgem and I brought us some IP in the area of a reference architecture for airlines, which we've formed a workgroup around. We've attracted some other airlines to get involved in that. We've started a government EA workgroup that's looking at the use of enterprise architecture and Togaaf in specific to government enterprises. Lots of new things happening at the open group. Our two newest forums are these two, so the open process automation forum and the open subsurface data universe forum. I'll start with the process automation forum. Basically going back a number of years ExxonMobil, a large oil and gas company, was looking at how do they make significant improvement in the way that they operate the plants. This is the operational technology. I think Pedro's presentation this morning touched on this forum and how their operation uses distributed control nodes and some of the challenges that exist in that area. Essentially, ExxonMobil was looking at the same challenges and going back a number of years wanted to make big improvements. They happened to see a consortium that the open group runs called the Face Consortium, which stands for future airborne capability environment that was creating a new technical standard for avionics systems inside of airplanes and specifically military airplanes. When the ExxonMobil people saw what we were doing in that area to create this new technical standard and to bring together both the suppliers of that equipment and the large purchasers of that equipment, which in that case was the U.S. government and the various branches of the military, the light bulb went off for the ExxonMobil people to say that maybe there's an approach to breaking what they perceived as a vendor controlled environment. In the world of distributed control nodes and industrial control systems, the equipment to this day is all still very proprietary. When you buy vendor Exx, you're locked into vendor Exx's equipment for an embarrassing and long period of time. In lots of cases, the equipment when it's put into a plant to operate an oil and gas plant will live for 20 years without significant upgrades. The set of issues that ExxonMobil was looking to change were things like breaking that vendor lock in and gaining the ability to put new technologies into a plant without waiting 20 years. They came to the open group. They asked us to consider starting a forum to address their needs. We held a number of end user focused industry days. We found when we start things like this that the important thing to do initially is to get the buying community on side and get them directly engaged. We brought together other oil and gas companies as well as companies from other industries, so pharmaceutical, mining, chemical, and others, and start to gather the requirements before we form the forum. I'll talk about the timeline here in a minute. Why it was created, the vision that Exxon had that was shared by the other end users that we brought together was to create a standards-based, open, interoperable, secure process automation architecture with those characteristics that it would allow easy integration of best-in-class components via interoperability, that it would be adaptive and intrinsically secure, that you'd have modular integration of certified components. It would help promote innovation and value creation and develop applications that could be ported across various platforms much more easily. The mission of the open process automation forum is to develop, publish, and evolve a realistic architecture and specifications that will be supported by not just end users, but the supplier community and integrators who are important in this world. The intent is to use existing standards, so the work of the forum is to develop a standard of standards, and we're putting in place liaison relationships with many existing standards organizations in the control systems area, so organizations like ISA and others. And then significantly, the forum is addressing both technical and business aspects, and I'll talk about some of those business aspects on a future slide. So I think you've seen this diagram before, and I won't talk a lot about it. The PetroBest presentation had it in it. I think the important thing here is to realize that the forum is really refactoring what it means to be a distributed control node. So they're effectively redefining what the elements are in a process control network with open process automation specification components in the plan. The targeted industry, so it turns out when we, the open group staff, looked at this opportunity and problem, it turns out that it is a much broader set of industries that use the same process control equipment from the same set of vendors, including food and beverage, refining, oil and gas, but the chemical, pharmaceutical, pulp and paper, and utilities. And so in starting this initiative, we brought together as many large companies from those industries as we could, so that we get a broad set of inputs regarding requirements from, for example, food and beverage companies. We've got a lot of oil and gas, as you'll see, a number of chemical companies and pharmaceutical companies, pulp and paper. So it was important to us to consider requirements from all of these various industries as we started to create the standard and specification. So at this point, the forum has been operating since about November of 2016, so just under two years, we've attracted something like 50 or 60 new members into the open group to work on this problem as a part of this forum. And there's also a number of our gold and platinum members that are participating in this forum, so people like IBM and Oracle and Phillips. And it's fair to say, I think, that there's been a lot of interest and a lot of engagement from the users of process control equipment along with the significant large suppliers. We've got most of the large suppliers in the forums, if I can, so you can see ABB, Schneider, Siemens is up there somewhere, Rockville Automation, GE, Emerson, from Yokagawa. So a number of the large vendors supplying that sort of equipment are buying into the idea that this standard will be good not just for the customers, but also for the vendors, not get to why that is in a minute. So the status, it was really started a little bit earlier in 2016, but we had our first meeting in November of 2016, and we did a formal launch early in 2017. We've defined the structure of the organization, I'll get into that. We've published some documents already, and interestingly, the first thing we did is start to publish standards and specifications. We published a business guide that really describes how the ecosystem supporting these customers looks today and how it's going to change with the development of these standards. And we've found from other efforts that doing that early on is needed and good because it reassures the vendor community that we're not leaving out their interests for considering them. You'll see when I get into some of the roles that exist in the ecosystem, that the role of suppliers and integrators, software, hardware, some of those things will change with this once a standard is published. And the business guide talks to how is that going to change and helps the vendors to get ready for that change. We published a requirements white paper in May of 2018. And the first snapshot of the technology architecture was published in June of 2018. So the organization of the forum looks like this. You've got a steering committee. All members are participating in that. All member organizations. We've got co-chairs from ExxonMobil, Don Bartusiak, a fellow who brought this to the open group, and Trevor Cusworth from Schneider Electric, the co-chairs. We have a business working group that's working on some of those business deliverables like the business guide that I mentioned. There's a standards body interface working group that is working on the liaisons with other organizations. There's an enterprise architecture working group and a technology working group that's actually building the standards. And it's worth noting both in this initiative and the one I'll talk about next that we are in the enterprise architecture working group. There's very much a focus on using the parts of TAOGAF that are applicable to developing a standard and using that in the operation of these forms. So this is a high level look at the roadmap for this forum. There's a publication of a business guide that I mentioned, the requirements white paper, the snapshot of the technical standard. There will be multiple detailed specifications at the software level, at the hardware level, and so on. There's also a reference implementation that is being planned. So there's a, in parallel to the standards work that the open group is doing, ExxonMobil funded the development of a reference implementation, a proof of concept, if you will, to help move this along. So that's happening in parallel to this standards activity. There is planned a development of a conformance program, so that this, just like with the UNIX standard and products, there'll be a similar sort of thing for this where if you're buying a UNIX system, you're assured that conforms to the UNIX standard because the open group has put it through a certification program. We're developing the same sort of thing for this standard effort. So buyers will be able to determine that if it says that it's conformed to the OPAS specification, it actually does. A procurement guide that will help describe how to specify an OPAS compliance system in procurements is being worked on and then other things that you see there. And just to wrap up on the open process automation forum, from the standpoint of why would end users get involved, it's really about helping them in the ways that you see here. So supporting reuse of control system applications. So if you're ExxonMobil and you develop some application software on top of your control systems, that that's not a wasted investment if you change suppliers of the DCMs. End users think it helps increase the value creation that can happen inside of these plant environments. I remember one of the comments that one of the ExxonMobil executives gave to me was that in terms of getting students fresh out of chemical engineering programs, bringing them into their plant environments, they would sit them down in front of systems that were 20 years old and had little to do with what the student had just learned. And that's obviously a problem in an industry that's trying to enable continuous innovation and attract younger workers into their job forces. End users, we think this will help solve system integration issues that they have. There's an opportunity here to make the next generation of systems intrinsically secure, which is a big deal generally. With technology and it's a big deal in these environments because frequently they get connected to the rest of the company, to the internet and so forth and are exposed to the same internet security issues that all other systems are. It empowers the workforce and ultimately reduces the cost of ownership. For suppliers, there's an opportunity to grow the top line revenues by enabling them to reach new markets and customers or to remain relevant to existing customers to create new goods and services for bigger markets. And then growing the bottom line by increasing margins, reducing costs, and eliminating investment in non-differentiated products. So we think there are benefits all the way around and the form is moving very fast to realize this vision and create the standard. So I thought I would take a few minutes to talk about this forum. It's called the Open Subsurface Data Universe Forum. The idea here is that oil and gas companies have lots and lots of data. They're one of the largest producers of raw volumes of data. And many of them are under the same kinds of cost pressures in their IT shops that everyone else is. They're looking for a variety of reasons to move that from being in-house and data centers to cloud services. So in this case, a different oil and gas company, Shell, brought this opportunity to us and they expressed it in this way. Various business problems. They have massive amounts of data, both structured and unstructured. It's siloed. There's a high cost for their legacy processing environments. They don't really have a lot of agility or choice in their environment. And basically they've been unable to migrate the data easily to cloud services. So they brought this to us actually in maybe May of this year. In July, we hosted a meeting in conjunction with our Houston conference for the companies that were interested in this early on. And we've now turned it into a forum when I'll talk more about who all is involved. But their vision is basically to create a common data platform for all exploration development and oil wells data, such that the data is no longer siloed. All data is available across all workflows. The data is ready for usage by machine learning and advanced analytics. Capabilities to enable the introduction of latest digital technologies for subsurface applications and to basically create a single set of APIs for the data platform for this kind of data living in a cloud service. So seeking to create a common platform for development, deployment and running of all those applications, microservices based with flexible workflows, unlimited capacity on public cloud services, development of applications, creating that ecosystem where it's easier for people to develop applications because there's a bigger market for them and a feeling that open source provides better dynamics in this space. So open source is a part of that vision. So the scope includes reference architecture for data driven subsurface data platform and reference implementations, covering those areas, including all of structured unstructured and real time data and all related services and public cloud based. So we think there are a number of benefits to the customers, organizations, the operators of oil and gas, common computing environment, allowing them to leverage cloud services for subsurface data. Basically enabling that interoperability and choice that they're looking for, allowing cost effective insertion of new capabilities and applications into their into their shops, providing a neutral home to work with fellow customers to develop common standards, reference implementations and tools. And having dealt with the early customer organizations on this, all of them are terrified of antitrust. Running a foul of antitrust, whether it's in the US or anywhere else. So the open group has proven governance methodologies, ways that we work to deal with that. We tell them all to leave discussions of pricing, things like that, out of out of these discussions. And we just focus on building a specification among the members. And then, you know, the ultimate benefit to customers that lets them speak with one voice to the supplier community, to the suppliers, which in this case is people like Microsoft, Amazon and other cloud service providers, as well as the application software providers. The benefits to them are the ability to influence the architecture and specifications, get early access to this specification as it emerges to network with other companies and their experts in a non competitive vendor, neutral environment, ultimately to lower commercial risk to the developers of applications in particular, because their software can be aimed at a target that is ultimately a much bigger market to provide the potential for expansion to other industries and perhaps other markets and ultimately position their company and their products for future procurement requirements. So the status on this one, I've mentioned some of this, but it was initiated by Shell, started as the Open Subsurface Data Universe Forum in July. There are now eight large operator companies committed to helping develop the standard of reference implementations. You can see the names there, many of the major oil companies are already on board as members and we're talking to others. We're inviting vendors to consider getting involved at this point. Microsoft are already members of the Open Group, but we're talking to the other cloud vendors about getting involved in this because we think it'll be a big market opportunity for them. We're recruiting member staff to staff the work groups that will do the work. The early work includes defining what a minimum viable product in this forum looks like and building that roadmap and driving towards a face-to-face founder's meeting with both the supply side of the vendors as well as the customers a little later this year. I think I've talked about all of this. Let's skip that. I will say both for, really for any Open Group forum or initiative, there are these kinds of opportunities to get involved. So whether it's the architecture forum, we look after TOGAF, the two forums that I just talked about, we have a security forum, we have an IT for IT forum. All of those forums and work groups in the Open Group rely on members to do much of the heavy lifting in writing standards and best practices. We have Open Group staff who facilitate collaboration within a forum or work group. We have editorial staff who edit documents and so forth, but really the members set the agenda and the members drive what happens in the forum. So there are opportunities for leadership as officers of a forum, for members to serve as chair, co-chair, vice chair. There are, as you saw in the organization structure that I put up there for the Open Process Forum, fairly detailed org charts with subcommittees on technical, on business, on various other things. There are leadership opportunities to get involved at that level and there's opportunities to contribute just industry knowledge, business or technology knowledge and so forth. So I would encourage you, if you're interested in that, to think about getting involved in any one of our activities, including these two. And that's just a logo slide of the companies involved to date in the Open Sub-Surface Data Universe Forum. So that's it for me. I will say I've been with the Open Group quite a number of years, 10 plus years. I was actually with X Open going back to the early days of the Unix Standards Development as well. And part of my role for sure is to work with people like yourselves who are using our standards, working with our training community and to hear what your needs and requirements are. So feel free during a break or during the cocktail hour to look me up. I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts about the Open Group and how we can serve you better. So thank you.