Document or File?

Posted by

​​

I am working on a project where the terms “document” and “files” are used interchangeably, causing some confusion. Our intent with this project is to have business users upload files (mostly MS Office format and PDF’s) through a process where they go through a validation step before becoming official documents. In our internal design sessions this has been a hard concept to grasp and this will only get worse when business users try to make the distinction.

Here is a description found through searching: “a file is a named collection of information that is recorded on some kind of storage device, while a document is a type of file that has been created by a particular software application, and can be manipulated by that application (e.g. a word processing document).”

This does not help since the “file” we get are actually “documents”. Any naming suggestions to help with this conundrum?

——————————
Perry Chapman
Senior Business Analyst
Granite Solutions Groupe
——————————

Traditionally a file is something that an individual user uses. Like an internal spreadsheet to report something of the business unit. A document would be classified as a “form” used in relationship to an external customer. Maybe a form filled out like a vendor application or an employee application.
That is my understanding of the functional distinction.
Index values and classifications with be different for both. Files would be department, user and time or version based. Documents would be time, form type, disposition and  external user classified.

Sorry Carl, but, I disagree.  I believe the definition Perry had is much more accurate where a document is a subset of file.  Any electronic container of data can be a file (for instance a program file, or a CAD file, or a video file, etc.), while a document signifies a particular nature of file such as a spreadsheet document, a word processor document, or a presentation document.
To my mind, this discussion on “file” vs “document” vs “record” etc… does not have a right and a wrong answer; rather, it highlights the need for us to respect each others’ specialties and training.

Is rosemary an herb?

If you were trained as a chef, you learned the culinary difference between an herb and a spice: an herb is derived from the leaves of the plant, and a spice comes from the root or the bark. Since rosemary imparts its flavour through the leaf, it is an herb.

But if you were trained as a doctor, you don’t care whether the origin of the medicine is the leaf or the stem; instead, you distinguish herbs from pharmaceuticals. Rosemary grows naturally, and is therefore clearly an herb.

BUT… if you were trained as a botanist, you would know that an herb has only leafy parts, like lettuce or grass. Since rosemary grows as leaves attached to a woody stem, it is in fact not an herb but a shrub.

Does that make the chefs and the doctors wrong? Of course not.

We could debate the terminology here for a long time, and I don’t think it would be productive. Our definitions of words like “document” and “file” are a product of our training. A better approach would be to specify what interpretation you intend each time you use those terms in a text or a discussion (and especially when writing policies).
——————————
Lewis S Eisen, J.D., C.I.P.
Perfect Policies
——————————
Lewis,
I would agree.
We all seem to learn distinctions of words the way we first encounter them and define them.
Like your doctor and such metaphor.
I would also say that based on your vendor language exposure could also sculpt your definition since this plays into the way they sell and structure their “solution” to the clients.
OnBase has a different idea VS EMC of what makes each. It’s just how they market and sell their products.
I take a bit of a more…anyone or anything can make a file, but a document is  specifically business centric in its approach. Files are more in line with acopy paste, draft word doc,,personal in nature. while documents are like FDA ISO file number 1029018.. etc
It may just be my GSA/FDA/GDPR experience sculpting the difference in my mind.
……Carl

As you are saying that this is a process where the upload is approved and will then be called “an official document”, I think it’s a matter of Status, not class name. After all the approval does not change the “thing” at all so it doesn’t suddenly “become” a Document.

So the unapproved thing should have a status of “draft” and the final one e.g. “approved” or “official”. But both are still “Documents”.

That said, at least in the UK, it’s common to hear people using “draft” as a noun for an unapproved document, then “document” when it’s official.

As the word “file” tends to mean a collection of something when it’s physical, and a single (binary) item when it’s in a computer, I try to avoid using it; as well as steering clear of  the word “folder” (as I’m trying to wean people off from even thinking in terms of hierarchical folder structures in storing data). Instead, I try to use “item” or “document” for a single thing, and “collection” or “dossier” for a group of things that belongs together.
——————————
Pauli Visuri
Consulting Director
Sharepoint City
——————————
Non-IT/IM folks tend to think of a “file” as that paper container you put documents in and think of a “document” as either a paper document or a Word/PDF “file”.

Because of the confusion regarding both terms, you may wish to consider using “item” or “artifact”  instead.  These terms are generic enough to encompass all types/formats of “files/documents” and may make the next conversation (metadata instead of containers) easier for folks to wrap their heads around.

Hope this helps…..
——————————
Beverly Brine, IGP
Business Analyst
Nova Scotia Pension Services Corporation
——————————
I’d recommend that you move away from “official document” as your target term.  You’re unlikely to address the file/document terminology problem.  What is it that you’re trying to convey with “official documents?”  Are you trying to say “approved” or are you trying to say “official” — if these are the key terms why make the distinction on “document”?  Why not insert a term for “draft” files/documents to drive the distinction?

Perhaps I’ve misunderstood what you’re trying to accomplish.

——————————
Robert Bogue
President
Thor Projects LLC
——————————

​Great input and discussion. Thanks!

To clarify the point of the “official document” status is to make sure it is properly categorized from a taxonomy standpoint so it can be managed as a record according to the rules/regulations that govern that particular document type.  An example would be a signed and approved mortgage application in PDF format that is assigned a taxonomy by a Lending Officer.  Since the taxonomy is assigned manually it is not considered “official” until it goes through a screening process (manual review, or automated) that verifies the validity of the taxonomy and is subsequently managed as a record in the ECM repository.

Based on the terms discussed I am leaning toward calling the uploaded file an “item” and once the taxonomy is validated calling it a “document” or “record”.

——————————
Perry Chapman
Senior Business Analyst
Granite Solutions Groupe
——————————

Perry,

The issue I see is that you’re intermixing the terminology to describe the “what” with the status of the “what”.  And interchangeably using document and record isn’t something I would recommend as a “record” could be a recording of a CEO’s call with stock analysts every quarter.  However, I think you would find few people that would agree that recording is a “document”.

It seems to me if you follow your original definition of the “what” between ‘file’ and ‘document’ and then separate out the status vector you may find it both simpler and more accurate.

Just how I see it from the information provided.
Hi there, I hate to throw an additional term into the mix, but due to similar issues – we are referring to items as “Information Resources”.  This way it covers the entire gamut of electronically produced data, such as photographs, case files, individual documents, projects, structured data, etc… they are all information resources.  Some are for preservation and others are not and may be destroyed once the business is finished with them.
Don’t know if this helps or just adds to the confusion.  😉
Michelle Nowlan
Senior Information Management Analyst

EAP Referral Agent

National Defence / Government of Canada

michelle.nowlan@…  613-901-6543 – 613-854-6997

Analyste senior de la gestion d’information

PAE agent d’orientation

Défense nationale / Gouvernement du Canada

michelle.nowlan@…  613-901-6543 – 613-854-6997
Michelle,

I like the globality of the term.  However, may I paly devil’s advocate for just a moment with a question?

If I use your definition of “covers the entire gamut of electronically produced data”, what if I’m in a meeting and I draw a data flow on the whiteboard.  Is that not both representing/containing and conveying/communicating ‘information’?  However, it’s neither electronic nor a discrete physical item (such as a file folder or a printed piece of paper or even an x-ray film).  So, from an ‘academic’ point of view, how does that fit with “information resource”?

 

Hi Lorne,

That is a very good ‘devil’s advocate’ question.  If you were one of my clients I would in return ask if the information produced on the whiteboard was of business value, or was it solely to be discarded after the meeting?  If it was of business value, and we (as a corporation) did not have a “smart board”, I would recommend taking an electronic image of the whiteboard and saving the image as an “information resource” in the corporate repository for knowledge and decision making.

Michelle Nowlan
Senior Information Management Analyst

EAP Referral Agent

National Defence / Government of Canada

michelle.nowlan@…  613-901-6543 – 613-854-6997

Analyste senior de la gestion d’information

PAE agent d’orientation

Défense nationale / Gouvernement du Canada

michelle.nowlan@…  613-901-6543 – 613-854-6997
I think a document is a specific type of file in which are stored communication stimuli targeting some of the human senses (text, images >> vision; audio >> hearing, etc).  A non-document file, on the other hand, is a storage unit, which can be store commands of an executable program, store a set of configuration parameters or store tabled game data, not meant to communicate/inform via stimulation of humans senses.

My 2 cents worth!  😉
Pedro

——————————
Pedro Correa
Sr Business Development Mgr, Americas
Papyrus Software
——————————

I don’t care for these definitions either, and understand how people can get confused.
People can grasp the concept of documents going into a file cabinet.  Collectively the documents are the file.  The organization of information on a storage device is traditionally know as a file system.  Objects are stored/files into the file system.
There are business document files and system object files, such as databases, logs, paging, tmp working space, initiation, applications. The term “object” is overloaded, but it’s not a business user concern.
A business document could be considered a file, but I think it’s not a great idea to point that out. The file is the method of organizing/storing the information collection.  A business document documents business transactions, contracts, processes, policies, people,  and technology.
Sorry about all the unnecessary words!
jana

Hi, Perry, et al.

Naming things may seem pretty basic, but once challenged on the meanings of these terms, it makes sense to have some sort of “before” and “after” concept model to describe a transformed piece of information.  I would suggest the following:

For me, a “document” is a better structured form of a “file”.  A “file” tends to be the raw product of a business function, whereas a “document” is what is consciously described and placed somewhere for retrieval, reference, and disposition at a later date.

File – unstructured information to be added to a system (document management system or a more-structured space), file attributes name and location are all you have to go by in managing them.

Document – information that has been added to that more structured area or a document management system.  It will be identified with some sort of unique ID, possess a relationship with other documents (part of a case file, or related by content type to similar transactions), and have some description more than simply a folder name, a date created, and a file name to go by.  .Such description can be case file close date (cutoff date), context for the transaction, key numbers or words to describe the contents for targeted or faceted searching, etc. – in other words, descriptive data that can be designed into the system/process that created it, or has some sort of “post-file” cataloging done to enhance its findability.

I’m sure smarter minds that mine have given this more thought, but I thought I’d throw it out there and see what sticks.
——————————
David Simmons
Senior Records Officer and Knowledge Management Specialist
U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
——————————
Hi all,

ISO9000:2015 defines a document as

Information and the medium on which it is contained

EXAMPLE Record, specification, procedure document, drawing, report, standard.

Note 1 to entry: The medium can be paper, magnetic, electronic or optical computer disc, photograph or master sample, or combination thereof.
Note 2 to entry: A set of documents, for example specifications and records, is frequently called “documentation”.
Note 3 to entry: Some requirements (e.g. the requirement to be readable) relate to all types of documents. However there can be different requirements for specifications (e.g. the requirement to be revision controlled) and for records (e.g. the requirement to be retrievable).

There is no status involved in this definition. The moment information is contained in a medium, it is a document. Whether you consider it draft or it an official thingie, it is always a document.

In our ‘SOP document management’ (which by the ways seems to have a status of ‘eternal draft’), we do mention the term ‘managed document’ which means that the document is stored in a corporate document management system (i.e. not a personal system like your harddrive and not a private system).  Even then it doesn’t mean that the managed document is stored well (with the right metadata etcetera), is or may become a record or could be considered as ‘ROT’, …

Best,

Pieter Jan

——————————
Pieter Jan Hermans
ECM Analyst / CIP
SCK•CEN
——————————
Thanks for sharing that Pieter.  While most of the time I really like standards, this would be a case in the rest of the time.

 

I believe a simpler way of looking at it is to see a file as a container and a document as the content within that container.

This concept overlaps with others offered in this thread, perhaps most closely with Pedro’s very precise definition of document/non-document files.
——————————
Warren Bean
Senior Sales Engineer
Zasio Enterprises Inc
http://www.zasio.com
800-513-1000, x841
——————————
I side with:
Warren: document = content, file = container
Beverly and Jana: do not use the terms “document” and “file” in business user systems, because they give rise to too much confusion, not only between business users and information professionals, but also between business users, information professionals and IT’ers. (For the same reasons, do not use the term “record”; Lorne, your devil’s advocate’s interpretation of the term “record” would make any records manager despair 😉)

In my studies in library and information management we were taught the IFLA Library Reference Model.
This model will not solve any terminological issues and risks of confusion, but I have found it very useful as a reference for the conceptual analysis of any information system, whether aimed at digital, analog or biogenetic 😉 “information resources”.

A short and, in my opinion, more accessible overview of this model is given by ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization  IFLA Library Reference Model (IEKO) . Once you have made a good analysis, setting the terminology will surely follow (more) easily.
.

——————————
Viona Rampelberg
Knowledge Manager
——————————

Excuse me?

 

——————————
Perry Chapman
Senior Business Analyst
Granite Solutions Groupe
——————————


Traditionally a file is something that an individual user uses. Like an internal spreadsheet to report something of the business unit. A document would be classified as a “form” used in relationship to an external customer. Maybe a form filled out like a vendor application or an employee application.

That is my understanding of the functional distinction.
Index values and classifications with be different for both. Files would be department, user and time or version based. Documents would be time, form type, disposition and  external user classified.

Sorry Carl, but, I disagree.  I believe the definition Perry had is much more accurate where a document is a subset of file.  Any electronic container of data can be a file (for instance a program file, or a CAD file, or a video file, etc.), while a document signifies a particular nature of file such as a spreadsheet document, a word processor document, or a presentation document.

 

Aria

Aria Business Card-0۸   Aria Business Card-۱۰


To my mind, this discussion on “file” vs “document” vs “record” etc… does not have a right and a wrong answer; rather, it highlights the need for us to respect each others’ specialties and training.

Is rosemary an herb?

If you were trained as a chef, you learned the culinary difference between an herb and a spice: an herb is derived from the leaves of the plant, and a spice comes from the root or the bark. Since rosemary imparts its flavour through the leaf, it is an herb.

But if you were trained as a doctor, you don’t care whether the origin of the medicine is the leaf or the stem; instead, you distinguish herbs from pharmaceuticals. Rosemary grows naturally, and is therefore clearly an herb.

BUT… if you were trained as a botanist, you would know that an herb has only leafy parts, like lettuce or grass. Since rosemary grows as leaves attached to a woody stem, it is in fact not an herb but a shrub.

Does that make the chefs and the doctors wrong? Of course not.

We could debate the terminology here for a long time, and I don’t think it would be productive. Our definitions of words like “document” and “file” are a product of our training. A better approach would be to specify what interpretation you intend each time you use those terms in a text or a discussion (and especially when writing policies).

——————————
Lewis S Eisen, J.D., C.I.P.
Perfect Policies
——————————


Lewis,
 I would agree.
We all seem to learn distinctions of words the way we first encounter them and define them.
Like your doctor and such metaphor.
I would also say that based on your vendor language exposure could also sculpt your definition since this plays into the way they sell and structure their “solution” to the clients.
OnBase has a different idea VS EMC of what makes each. It’s just how they market and sell their products.
I take a bit of a more…anyone or anything can make a file, but a document is  specifically business centric in its approach. Files are more in line with acopy paste, draft word doc,,personal in nature. while documents are like FDA ISO file number 1029018.. etc
 It may just be my GSA/FDA/GDPR experience sculpting the difference in my mind.
……Carl

As you are saying that this is a process where the upload is approved and will then be called “an official document”, I think it’s a matter of Status, not class name. After all the approval does not change the “thing” at all so it doesn’t suddenly “become” a Document.

So the unapproved thing should have a status of “draft” and the final one e.g. “approved” or “official”. But both are still “Documents”.

That said, at least in the UK, it’s common to hear people using “draft” as a noun for an unapproved document, then “document” when it’s official.

As the word “file” tends to mean a collection of something when it’s physical, and a single (binary) item when it’s in a computer, I try to avoid using it; as well as steering clear of  the word “folder” (as I’m trying to wean people off from even thinking in terms of hierarchical folder structures in storing data). Instead, I try to use “item” or “document” for a single thing, and “collection” or “dossier” for a group of things that belongs together.

——————————
Pauli Visuri
Consulting Director
Sharepoint City
——————————


Non-IT/IM folks tend to think of a “file” as that paper container you put documents in and think of a “document” as either a paper document or a Word/PDF “file”.

Because of the confusion regarding both terms, you may wish to consider using “item” or “artifact”  instead.  These terms are generic enough to encompass all types/formats of “files/documents” and may make the next conversation (metadata instead of containers) easier for folks to wrap their heads around.

Hope this helps…..

——————————
Beverly Brine, IGP
Business Analyst
Nova Scotia Pension Services Corporation
——————————


I’d recommend that you move away from “official document” as your target term.  You’re unlikely to address the file/document terminology problem.  What is it that you’re trying to convey with “official documents?”  Are you trying to say “approved” or are you trying to say “official” — if these are the key terms why make the distinction on “document”?  Why not insert a term for “draft” files/documents to drive the distinction?

Perhaps I’ve misunderstood what you’re trying to accomplish.

——————————
Robert Bogue
President
Thor Projects LLC
——————————


​Great input and discussion. Thanks!

To clarify the point of the “official document” status is to make sure it is properly categorized from a taxonomy standpoint so it can be managed as a record according to the rules/regulations that govern that particular document type.  An example would be a signed and approved mortgage application in PDF format that is assigned a taxonomy by a Lending Officer.  Since the taxonomy is assigned manually it is not considered “official” until it goes through a screening process (manual review, or automated) that verifies the validity of the taxonomy and is subsequently managed as a record in the ECM repository.

Based on the terms discussed I am leaning toward calling the uploaded file an “item” and once the taxonomy is validated calling it a “document” or “record”.

——————————
Perry Chapman
Senior Business Analyst
Granite Solutions Groupe
——————————


Perry,

The issue I see is that you’re intermixing the terminology to describe the “what” with the status of the “what”.  And interchangeably using document and record isn’t something I would recommend as a “record” could be a recording of a CEO’s call with stock analysts every quarter.  However, I think you would find few people that would agree that recording is a “document”.

It seems to me if you follow your original definition of the “what” between ‘file’ and ‘document’ and then separate out the status vector you may find it both simpler and more accurate.

Just how I see it from the information provided.

 

Aria

Aria Business Card-0۸   Aria Business Card-۱۰

 


Hi there, I hate to throw an additional term into the mix, but due to similar issues – we are referring to items as “Information Resources”.  This way it covers the entire gamut of electronically produced data, such as photographs, case files, individual documents, projects, structured data, etc… they are all information resources.  Some are for preservation and others are not and may be destroyed once the business is finished with them.

 

Don’t know if this helps or just adds to the confusion.  😉

 

Michelle Nowlan


Senior Information Management Analyst

EAP Referral Agent

National Defence / Government of Canada

michelle.nowlan@…  613-901-6543 – 613-854-6997

Analyste senior de la gestion d’information

PAE agent d’orientation

Défense nationale / Gouvernement du Canada

michelle.nowlan@…  613-901-6543 – 613-854-6997


Michelle,

I like the globality of the term.  However, may I paly devil’s advocate for just a moment with a question?

If I use your definition of “covers the entire gamut of electronically produced data”, what if I’m in a meeting and I draw a data flow on the whiteboard.  Is that not both representing/containing and conveying/communicating ‘information’?  However, it’s neither electronic nor a discrete physical item (such as a file folder or a printed piece of paper or even an x-ray film).  So, from an ‘academic’ point of view, how does that fit with “information resource”?

 

Aria

Aria Business Card-0۸   Aria Business Card-۱۰


Hi Lorne,

That is a very good ‘devil’s advocate’ question.  If you were one of my clients I would in return ask if the information produced on the whiteboard was of business value, or was it solely to be discarded after the meeting?  If it was of business value, and we (as a corporation) did not have a “smart board”, I would recommend taking an electronic image of the whiteboard and saving the image as an “information resource” in the corporate repository for knowledge and decision making.

Michelle Nowlan


Senior Information Management Analyst

EAP Referral Agent

National Defence / Government of Canada

michelle.nowlan@…  613-901-6543 – 613-854-6997

Analyste senior de la gestion d’information

PAE agent d’orientation

Défense nationale / Gouvernement du Canada

michelle.nowlan@…  613-901-6543 – 613-854-6997

 


I think a document is a specific type of file in which are stored communication stimuli targeting some of the human senses (text, images >> vision; audio >> hearing, etc).  A non-document file, on the other hand, is a storage unit, which can be store commands of an executable program, store a set of configuration parameters or store tabled game data, not meant to communicate/inform via stimulation of humans senses.

My 2 cents worth!  😉
Pedro

——————————
Pedro Correa
Sr Business Development Mgr, Americas
Papyrus Software
——————————


I don’t care for these definitions either, and understand how people can get confused.
People can grasp the concept of documents going into a file cabinet.  Collectively the documents are the file.  The organization of information on a storage device is traditionally know as a file system.  Objects are stored/files into the file system.
There are business document files and system object files, such as databases, logs, paging, tmp working space, initiation, applications. The term “object” is overloaded, but it’s not a business user concern.
A business document could be considered a file, but I think it’s not a great idea to point that out. The file is the method of organizing/storing the information collection.  A business document documents business transactions, contracts, processes, policies, people,  and technology.
Sorry about all the unnecessary words!
jana

Hi, Perry, et al.

Naming things may seem pretty basic, but once challenged on the meanings of these terms, it makes sense to have some sort of “before” and “after” concept model to describe a transformed piece of information.  I would suggest the following:

For me, a “document” is a better structured form of a “file”.  A “file” tends to be the raw product of a business function, whereas a “document” is what is consciously described and placed somewhere for retrieval, reference, and disposition at a later date.

File – unstructured information to be added to a system (document management system or a more-structured space), file attributes name and location are all you have to go by in managing them.

Document – information that has been added to that more structured area or a document management system.  It will be identified with some sort of unique ID, possess a relationship with other documents (part of a case file, or related by content type to similar transactions), and have some description more than simply a folder name, a date created, and a file name to go by.  .Such description can be case file close date (cutoff date), context for the transaction, key numbers or words to describe the contents for targeted or faceted searching, etc. – in other words, descriptive data that can be designed into the system/process that created it, or has some sort of “post-file” cataloging done to enhance its findability.

I’m sure smarter minds that mine have given this more thought, but I thought I’d throw it out there and see what sticks.

——————————
David Simmons
Senior Records Officer and Knowledge Management Specialist
U.S. GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
——————————


Hi all,

ISO9000:2015 defines a document as

Information and the medium on which it is contained

EXAMPLE Record, specification, procedure document, drawing, report, standard.

Note 1 to entry: The medium can be paper, magnetic, electronic or optical computer disc, photograph or master sample, or combination thereof.
Note 2 to entry: A set of documents, for example specifications and records, is frequently called “documentation”.
Note 3 to entry: Some requirements (e.g. the requirement to be readable) relate to all types of documents. However there can be different requirements for specifications (e.g. the requirement to be revision controlled) and for records (e.g. the requirement to be retrievable).

There is no status involved in this definition. The moment information is contained in a medium, it is a document. Whether you consider it draft or it an official thingie, it is always a document.

In our ‘SOP document management’ (which by the ways seems to have a status of ‘eternal draft’), we do mention the term ‘managed document’ which means that the document is stored in a corporate document management system (i.e. not a personal system like your harddrive and not a private system).  Even then it doesn’t mean that the managed document is stored well (with the right metadata etcetera), is or may become a record or could be considered as ‘ROT’, …

Best,

Pieter Jan

——————————
Pieter Jan Hermans
ECM Analyst / CIP
SCK•CEN
——————————


Thanks for sharing that Pieter.  While most of the time I really like standards, this would be a case in the rest of the time��.

Aria

Aria Business Card-0۸   Aria Business Card-۱۰


I believe a simpler way of looking at it is to see a file as a container and a document as the content within that container.

This concept overlaps with others offered in this thread, perhaps most closely with Pedro’s very precise definition of document/non-document files.

——————————
Warren Bean
Senior Sales Engineer
Zasio Enterprises Inc
www.zasio.com
800-513-1000, x841
——————————


I side with:

  • Warren: document = content, file = container
  • Beverly and Jana: do not use the terms “document” and “file” in business user systems, because they give rise to too much confusion, not only between business users and information professionals, but also between business users, information professionals and IT’ers. (For the same reasons, do not use the term “record”; Lorne, your devil’s advocate’s interpretation of the term “record” would make any records manager despair 😉)

In my studies in library and information management we were taught the IFLA Library Reference Model.
This model will not solve any terminological issues and risks of confusion, but I have found it very useful as a reference for the conceptual analysis of any information system, whether aimed at digital, analog or biogenetic 😉 “information resources”.

A short and, in my opinion, more accessible overview of this model is given by ISKO Encyclopedia of Knowledge Organization  IFLA Library Reference Model (IEKO) . Once you have made a good analysis, setting the terminology will surely follow (more) easily.
.

——————————
Viona Rampelberg
Knowledge Manager
——————————


Excuse me?

Aria

Aria Business Card-0۸   Aria Business Card-۱۰

 

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.