The Best Lottery Provider in Asia

Created by iGaming Solutions News & Support by Winto

The lottery industry has experienced an exciting transformation, thanks to advancements in iGaming platform solutions and cutting-edge technology. The rise of Lottery 4D has introduced a more engaging and strategic form of lottery betting, making it one of the most popular lottery formats in Asia.

As the demand for digital lottery gaming grows, platforms like Winto Lottery are leading the charge, offering seamless, secure, and innovative lottery solutions. Whether you’re an experienced player or new to the lottery world, this article explores the future of lottery gamingthe best lottery providers in Asia, lottery affiliate opportunities, and how Winto iGaming is revolutionizing the sector.

The Evolution of Lottery Gaming in Asia

The lottery has been a favored game of chance for centuries, offering the potential to win life-changing jackpots. However, with the digital revolution, traditional paper-based lottery systems have evolved into sophisticated online lottery 4D platforms. This evolution has expanded access, increased security, and improved player experiences.

Key Advancements in Digital Lottery Gaming:

  1. Online & Mobile Accessibility
    • Players can now purchase lottery tickets from anywhere, anytime, using mobile apps and online platforms.
  2. Secure Payment Gateways
    • Digital lottery platforms support multiple payment methods, including e-wallets, credit cards, and cryptocurrencies.
  3. Live Drawings for Transparency
    • Winto Live Drawing offers real-time lottery draws, ensuring fairness and transparency for all players.
  4. AI & Data Analytics for Smart Bets
    • AI-powered lottery prediction tools analyze past draws to help players make informed decisions.
  5. Global Participation
    • Players can access local and international lotteries, increasing their chances of winning big jackpots.

What Makes Lottery 4D Special?

Lottery 4D is a strategic form of lottery betting that is widely popular across Asia. Unlike traditional number draws, 4D lottery allows players to select four-digit combinations, giving them multiple betting options and higher payout potential.

Why Lottery 4D is Gaining Popularity:

  1. Multiple Betting Styles
    • Players can place big, small, straight, and permutation bets for better odds.
  2. High Payout Ratios
    • Depending on the bet type, Lottery 4D offers significantly higher payouts than standard lotteries.
  3. Frequent Draws
    • Many providers, including Winto Online Lottery 4D, conduct daily or bi-weekly draws, keeping the excitement alive.
  4. Live Streaming & Real-Time Results
    • Winto Live Drawing ensures that results are transparent, verifiable, and streamed in high definition.
  5. Integrated with Online Casinos
    • Platforms like Winto Casino integrate Lottery 4D with other gaming options, providing a seamless experience.

Best Lottery Provider in Asia: Why Winto Leads the Market

Asia online lottery market is competitive, but Winto Provider stands out as a leading force in digital lottery gaming. Winto iGaming delivers world-class lottery solutions that cater to both players and operators.

Why Winto is the Best Lottery Provider in Asia:

  • Trusted Reputation: A well-established name in the iGaming industry.
  • Multi-Platform Accessibility: Players can access Winto Online Lottery 4D via desktop, mobile, and tablet.
  • Diverse Lottery Offerings: From jackpot lotteries to instant win scratch cards.
  • Real-Time Winto Live Drawing: Ensures fair play and transparency.
  • Top-Notch Security: Blockchain technology and encrypted transactions protect player funds and data.

By combining cutting-edge technology with engaging lottery experiences, Winto Lottery sets the gold standard in digital lottery gaming.

Latest iGaming Game ReviewsTop Lottery Games to Play

Lottery gaming continues to evolve, and Winto iGaming consistently delivers the most innovative lottery games. Here are the latest and most exciting lottery options available:

1. Winto Lottery 4D

2. Winto Jackpot Draws

  • A progressive lottery where the jackpot continues to grow until a winner claims it.

3. Crypto-Based Lottery Games

  • A blockchain-powered lottery ensuring anonymous and secure transactions.

4. Scratch & Win Games

  • Instant win scratch card games with exciting jackpot prizes.

5. Hybrid Lottery Games

  • A fusion of lottery mechanics and slot game elements, adding a new level of excitement.

These latest iGaming game reviews highlight how Winto iGaming is consistently innovating in the lottery sector.

Lottery Affiliate OpportunitiesEarn with Winto Lottery

Lottery affiliate programs present an incredible earning potential for marketers and gaming influencers. Winto Lottery offers one of the most lucrative lottery affiliate opportunities, enabling partners to earn commissions for every player they refer.

Benefits of the Winto Lottery Affiliate Program:

  • High Commission Rates: Earn a percentage of every ticket sale.
  • Real-Time Tracking: Access detailed analytics on player activity and earnings.
  • Marketing Tools & Resources: Banners, landing pages, and promotional materials.
  • Long-Term Passive Income: Generate consistent earnings through referred players.

By joining Winto iGaming affiliate network, partners can capitalize on the booming online lottery market.

How to Contact Winto Teams for Business & Support

Interested in partnering with Winto Provider or need customer support? Here’s how you can reach the Winto teams:

  1. Website Contact Form:
  2. 24/7 Customer Support:
    • Get assistance through live chat, email, or direct phone support.
  3. Affiliate & Partner Networks:
    • Business inquiries can be handled through dedicated affiliate managers and partner portals.
  4. Social Media & Community Engagement:

Future of iGaming: Where Lottery & 4D Are Headed

The future of iGaming and Lottery 4D is driven by technological innovations, regulatory enhancements, and changing player preferences.

Upcoming Trends in Digital Lottery:

  • Augmented Reality (AR) Lotteries: Bringing interactive experiences to digital lotteries.
  • Decentralized Lottery Platforms: Leveraging blockchain to create fully autonomous lottery draws.
  • AI-Driven Lottery Predictions: Machine learning algorithms predicting winning number patterns.
  • Personalized Lottery Experiences: Gamification and loyalty rewards for engaged players.

With Winto iGaming at the forefront of these developments, the future of lottery gaming is brighter than ever.

Conclusion: Winto Lottery Defines the Future of Online Lottery Gaming

Lottery gaming has entered a new era, with Winto Lottery 4D leading the way. As the best lottery provider in Asia, Winto iGaming delivers unparalleled digital lottery experiences, secure transactions, and exciting jackpot draws.

Whether you’re a player, operator, or affiliate, Winto Lottery provides endless opportunities to win big and earn passive income. The digital transformation of lottery gaming is here, and with Winto Live Drawing, the future of iGaming has never looked more exciting!

„Body and Violin Fusion“ – Latest Compositional Concept IX

The piece is based on both the played and recorded materials. While it holds an overall concept, it is not a traditional written score but rather, it depends heavily on and is closely connected to the processed sounds and the programming aspect. The core idea of the piece revolves around the transition from the acoustic sound of the violin to processed and electronic sounds. This transition reflects with my own musical journey, from a classical violinist to an electroacoustic musician. Although the piece is not fully improvised, it still allows for a sense of freedom, enabling the performer to interact with the processed sounds, which vary each time during the performance. The structure of the piece is sectional, and with each step, it shifts further into the electronic domain. The starting point of that is a loop of each buffer, where the sounds are heard not being played in real-time by the performer.

Pieces like Suspensions by Atau Tanaka[1] and Weapon of Choice by Alexander Schubert[2] and also the book of Marije Baalman Composing Interactions[3], played a significant role in shaping the artistic direction of this set up. They helped me establish a connection between the technical and artistic aspects of the it, and to blend improvisation with electronic manipulation in a meaningful way.

My intention was to unify the entire piece, where in addition to the processed sound, the performer also plays live. This way, the piece does not entirely become electronic, instead it creates a polyphonic sound where different materials blend into each other. I also aimed to incorporate extended techniques on the violin, such as bowing on the body of the instrument, to capture the texture of the wood’s sound, among others. These techniques create variations with each performance attempt.

Since there is no fixed score for the piece, the timing is inherently variable. It depends not only on the recorded materials but also on the length and nature of the interactions between the performer and the electronic sounds. The performer’s engagement with the processed sounds can fluctuate, leading to different pacing and moments of intensity. Although that there is more or less clear that the most intense or the chaotic part is the moment that granular patches arise.

Towards the end of the piece I considered two possible approaches, both of which could be easily implemented within the patch. The first scenario involved abruptly cutting off the sound while the piece remained in its chaotic phase, with the violin accompanying this sudden act. The second scenario entailed first progressively increasing in intensity and then gradually fading out, so this version has a more gradual transition. These two variations could significantly alter the conceptual framework of the piece as well, either aligning with my intention to conclude with a sense of resolution or opening the door to further exploration and discovery. For now, I have chosen to conclude the piece by gradually reducing its dynamic intensity and stabilizing the sound. However this decision is not necessarily final, as the compositional process remains open to further refinement.

„Body and Violin Fusion“ – Wekinator VIII

As a result, the data values became irregular and began with a range of negative values. The attempt to provide more history to the All continues type was unsuccessful, as there were even more fluctuations in the outputs, and I couldn’t really relate to these outputs in terms of using them for an interaction.

So in conclusion I primarily used real sensor data with some scaling and processing, as the changes were smoother. This approach was suitable because, for the parts of the composition that required continuous data control, no complex gestures were involved. So I have used simple x, y, and z values, which provided sufficient accuracy and responsiveness.

Another approach was to remove the 3x rotation and total acceleration from the sensor data during the training phase to simplify the inputs for Wekinator. This was done to ensure that only the necessary data was provided, potentially making it easier for Wekinator to build a model and would result in a more efficient training. This plan proved successful, as it led to clearer outputs, which for now I have continued with this setup, using only the 3x acceleration data as the input for training Wekinator models.

The last effort in providing better data input to Wekinator was firstly to send constant data values by using the [metro] object to repeatedly trigger sensor readings at a fixed interval. If the system stops receiving data when the sensor is not moving, even for a few milliseconds, it might interpret this as a loss of connection or a gap in data, potentially leading to misinterpretations. Secondly, I tried recording some examples in Wekinator without moving my hand (just keeping it still and then pressing the record button) while maintaining a position aligned with the initial movement. I also tried to record values that were not too low in terms of speed because, as seen in the data display, low values are mostly noise and not very useful as the higher acceleration values which have a greater impact. In practice, there was a slight improvement in sensor functionality, though not significantly noticeable. But I decided to stick with this configuration, as theoretically it ensures a more stable and reliable data flow, although there should be a balance for recording more aggressive and faster movements, it also needs to align with the tempo and the overall aesthetic concept of the performance.

It is also worth mentioning that there is the possibility for experimentation with the settings of the Wekinator itself and changing the routing matrix, such as the input/output connection editor, which helped me in the early stages but not in the final one. And also WekiInputHelper, a software component that helps manage data from a feature extractor (the part that collects data), sits between Max MSP and Wekinator. It has features such as calculating the minimum, maximum, average, or standard deviation of data over time, collecting and storing data in a memory buffer, calculating changes in data (like the difference from the previous value), performing custom math, applying filters, and controlling how often data is sent or sending data only when certain conditions are met.

„Body and Violin Fusion“ – Wekinator VII

After establishing the connection between the two software programs, an effort was made to understand Wekinator’s three output types in relation to the composition concept and their application within the patches.

All classifiers or classification outputs represent distinct categories such as Position 1, Position 2 and Position 3. It is necessary to specify to Wekinator how many categories to use. Wekinator outputs numbers, such as 1, 2 or 3, corresponding to categories 1, 2, 3. It attempts to categorize each new input provided.

All continuous outputs generate numeric values within a defined range, divided into two types: Real-valued, for example to control smooth changes like any sliders, and Integer-valued, to adjust parameters such as filter cutoff frequency with an integer output.

The third type in Wekinator is Dynamic Time Warping (DTW), which is used to recognize and compare more complex patterns over time. Wekinator sends different output messages for different output types, for instance when it builds numeric or classification models, it computes a set of output values every time it sees a new input, but when Wekinator builds a dynamic time warping model, it continually looks at the input (despite the speed and the duration of them) to see how closely the current shape of the input, matches each of the example shapes or the trained patterns, this means that the random movements will provide no inputs from the Wekinator.

Figure 1. An overview of Wekinator Types in the Software

In my initial attempts, I tried to record multiple examples for each motion and map the DTW to turn on/off different gates and trigger some selected parameters once during the piece. However, after numerous trials it became clear to me that the absolute value of the DTW is not crucial and cannot be effectively mapped to so many distinct parts. As a result, I decided to use an unlatching or momentary switch pedal for this purpose instead.

Later, I decided to utilize DTW for granular synthesis and the chorus section. I assigned different motion patterns to trigger various parts of these effects, ensuring that any misreadings or constant values would not negatively impact the piece. This approach prevents the possibility of silence, as multiple triggers occur in succession based on different movements. To make the process more optimal, I attempted to convert the float output values of the DTW, which typically range from around 3.0 to 13.0, into a single integer state. From the resulting three integer output data streams, I selected the highest or winner value, as it represents the most probable outcome. Additionally, I implemented a timeout mechanism using a gate with a 5-millisecond delay for the on/off cycle. This ensures that the selected winner motion remains active for a short duration, helping to stabilize the output and prevent rapid fluctuations.

As the distinct categories in the classification did not contribute effectively to the compositional process, I decided not to use them for this project. Instead, I focused on working with continuous outputs to manipulate various sections, such as reverb and pitch shift during the piece. But since the outputs were not very smooth, I assumed that the lack of historical data in this type of Wekinator might be the reason, so I considered that providing more past values could lead to more consistent results.

To address this, I mapped the sensors to the DTW and then used 10 data values (7 directly from the sensors and 3 from the DTW outputs) to train another Wekinator for continuous control. Additionally, different port and message names were required for the input and output so that Wekinator could distinguish them from the DTW data.

Figure 2. Max MSP Data Exchange and Configuration For DTW and All Continues Data Types

„Body and Violin Fusion“ – Wekinator VI

After deciding on the types of interactions in the programming part, I realized the need to use machine learning techniques to map more complex gestures and analyze and compare them. I was looking for an external library that could help me with that so I could integrate all parts of the work into a single software. I came across ml.lib7, developed by Ali Momeni and Jamie Bullock for Max MSP and Pure Data, which is primarily based on the Gesture Recognition Toolkit8 by Nick Gillian.

Unfortunately, none of the objects from the package were able to load in Max MSP, and I encountered an error indicating that the object bundle executable could not be loaded. I also discovered that the creators had discontinued support and debugging for the library. However, it appears that the library still works on windows, both in Max MSP and Pure Data and on macOS, only for Pure Data.

Since I had developed all the patches and processing parts in Max MSP on macOS, I decided to work with Wekinator, an open-source machine learning software created by Rebecca Fiebrink, which sends and receives data via OSC. In the early stages, I tried to [pack] all the sensor datas (3x rotations, 3x accelerations and 1x total acceleration) and send/receive them to/from Wekinator via the [udpsend] and [udpreceive] objects.

One important consideration, which is basic but necessary, is to use the same port number for the inputs. If running everything on the same computer, the localhost address is by default 6448. Another key point is that the message name used to send inputs from Max should match with the one in Wekinator e.g., /wek/inputs. The same considerations apply when receiving outputs from Wekinator. Another important factor is that Wekinator needs to know the number of inputs and outputs to properly configure the machine learning model. At this stage, I set it to 7 inputs and chose to receive 3 outputs from Wekinator.

Figure 1. Real-Time Data Exchange and Configuration Between Max MSP and Wekinator

„Body and Violin Fusion“ – Programming V

Additionally, there are other abstractions that I found necessary during the practice phase. For instance, using the [jit.grab] object to digitize video from an external source like the laptop’s front-facing camera to observe my hand movements.

At the end I used a feature found in the Extras menu of Max MSP to record and play back the Max output, as well as another buffer to record the acoustic sound of the violin, for further synchronization and mixing.

Some parts of the patch were placed in abstractions to make the patch clearer and easier to follow for the violinist, as well as to make it more accessible in different sections. This will require opening multiple windows on the screen based on the performer’s preference. Nevertheless, a presentation mode of the main patch can also be considered, offering a simplified, performance-oriented interface that allows the violinist to focus on essential controls and visual elements without unnecessary distractions.

It is also worth mentioning that the function of the pedals (for 8 interactions) for the first 5 parts is to turn each one on/off, meaning the pedal needs to be pressed twice for each. However, for the last 3 parts, only one press is required. A counter number is included in this section to display the current interaction number, helping to prevent confusion while pressing the pedal.

Microsoft Word – Exposé III.docx

Figure 1. An overview of pedals functions and interactions in Max MSP

„Body and Violin Fusion“ – Programming IV

The programming strategy was to begin by recording the violin to gather materials for further processing during the piece. I used four buffers (with applied Hanning windows to smooth the edges of the signal), recording into them sequentially for later looping. The buffers will be triggered via a pedal, which activated each buffer one after the other using a counter.

After recording into the four buffers, the gate for pitch shifting of one or two buffers would open, as they contain more low-frequency content, making the pitch shift more noticeable. The pitch shift was controlled in real-time using sensor data, specifically the Y-axis rotation parameter.

After exploring pitch shifting while playing the violin, the next gate will gradually increase the reverb gain over 10 seconds, rising from -70 dB to -5 dB. The reverb parameters (size, decay time, high-frequency damping and diffusion) are controlled by real sensor data, including the Y-axis rotation. The core concept of the reverb patch is inspired by the [yafr 2] as a plate reverb by Randy Jones, in the style of Griesinger, and is part of the Max MSP library.

Next, I applied another gain adjustment using the same approach over 20 seconds to gradually introduce the chorus and granular sections. For this part, I primarily used DTW data from Wekinator to switch between different granular synthesis patches, while real sensor data controlled the chorus via the X-axis rotation parameter. The setup includes six granular synthesis patches, triggered at varying tempos. Three of these patches feature randomized start/stop (grain positions) and duration settings, creating diverse densities and sizes of the grain with or without pitch shifting and reverse effects. The remaining three granular patches have their parameters controlled by the Y-axis rotation sensor. In this section, the resulting sound creates harmony across different frequency ranges.

“ontextC” – Technical Diary 10

What happened so far?

For the exhibition, I set up an interface with a parameter slider with values relative to the actual value. I set up the software so the reference audio alternates between a stretch factor of 110 and 25 every time someone saves their result, to get an idea of how good the recognition resolution is at higher values. I noticed in my testing stage with myself that in the last third of the values, my own guesses strayed a bit further from the actual parameter value, whereas in the lowest third they were usually very accurate.

The final exhibition setup in presentation mode (Picture credit: Mahtab Jafarzadehmiandehi)


Since I would not be able to be present for the opening myself, I added a minimal interface in the patching mode so my colleagues would be able to save the data at the end of the day.

Max interface for saving the collected data

For the exhibition setup, I rented an iPad, a laptop, and an iPad stand, and I ran Cycling’74’s Mira app on the iPad with guided access enabled. Like this, I could pretty much maintain the GUI I had set up in Max’s presentation mode already, with some minor changes (e.g.: changing slider objects into Mira-compatible live.slider objects). Initially, I wanted to try connecting the laptop and iPad via Wi-fi to be more flexible with the placement of the laptop on site, but ultimately connecting the two devices via USB was a safer option, especially since I also had to consider the ease of setup for my colleagues on site.

Building the test setup for the exhibit at home

I also fastened a hook onto the iPad stand using zip ties to be able to hang a pair of headphones there. On-site, a white box with a hole in the middle for the cables was put over the laptop to protect it and give the exhibit a clean look. I recorded a video of myself explaining and turning the exhibit on and off in advance, so my colleagues could have it as a reference when setting up.

When I returned, I found that there had been some issues with turning the exhibit off and on some days, and some of the data was unfortunately lost because it had been overwritten in my absence. Luckily, the data for two days remained available, leaving me with a total of 31 test results (16 for the factor of 110 and 15 for the factor of 25). As expected, the results were a little bit all over the place, since of course an exhibition is also an informal setting that can (and should) invite people to primarily explore, but I was also able to detect some subtle trends of the nature that I had observed with myself. Of course, with this small sample size and setting it is not recommended to come to fixed conclusions, since there are just so many uncontrolled variables, but it was still interesting to see how some people seemed to have used the tool and that they did in fact try it out.

Ongoing

Now it is time to properly discuss and evaluate the test setup and the data results, as well as reflect on the overall process of creating the Max4Live device. There is still some work that I want to do for the GUI, and I also want to clean up the cord connections in my Max patch to make them easier to trace for others in case I ever do decide to share the patch. Lastly, I would like to prepare sound examples to show during the presentation in advance.

Results and Reflection

The exhibition setup was definitely a new experience for me, since it forced me to articulate my process in a way that could be understood by any other person, and I also needed to provide documentation that would enable people to use the setup regardless of me being available on site or not. Of course, it was unfortunate that I missed out on the larger amount of data from the opening, but I am glad that there is at least some data from days when I received confirmation that the exhibit worked as intended – the whole process really added a new layer of learning outcomes to the project for me. Not only did I have to figure out data collection in the Max environment, but I also learned about an application I had been unfamiliar with before, thought about setup considerations in a real location (safety, cable management, exhibit design) and took mental notes on how the process of saving data could be simplified for other projects.

Objectives for Next Time (= the final presentation)

  • Document project implementation
  • Finalise GUI
  • Prepare presentation

“ontextC” – Technical Diary 9

What happened so far?

Recently, time spent working on the project was dedicated to figuring out how to best turn it into an exhibit that is both somewhat valuable for the user, as well as for research purposes. I knew that it would be important to keep the interface intuitive, and at the same time not to clutter it with information. Furthermore, a good solution was needed to collect parameter data – after some research and experiments I found that the coll object would work best for my purpose, with its ability to capture an index number and separate data input with commas, allowing me to then export the anonymous results as a CSV file. The save button and volume adjustments were non-negotiable, but I struggled a bit with how to best implement options to play back the source sound as well as the processed sound in a way that made sense just from looking at the interface. Another aspect I considered was that I would need a “phantom” slider for the visible interface for the user, meaning that after the previous person saves it always jumps to a random value, but looks as if the slider is back at the center. Like this, test subjects cannot copy the results from the previous person and really have to rely on their hearing to match the processed audio as closely as possible to the source sound.

Preliminary interface for the exhibition/survey

Ongoing

During a supervisor meeting, we tried think of a way to improve the playback situation – ideally three buttons at the centre of the screen would be enough. One option would be to have the playback of the original sound be gated, so that whenever it stops playing, the processed sound starts automatically. It is definitely something that still needs more thought and a better practical solution.

Results and Reflection

That this part of the project will be shown to the public definitely added a new challenge, because now it is not just about whether the software makes sense to me, but also whether it can be translated to a first-time user with little to no experience. The idea of people using their hearing to adjust the parameter in a sort of audioscope-like manner is very interesting to me though, and I look forward to seeing the results – I wonder how accurate the resolution of the parameter has to be for people to not notice a significant difference anymore, and how much it varies between people.

Objectives for Next Time

  • Finalise exhibit version (software)
  • Figure out physical exhibition setup
  • Write guideline how to set up/turn the exhibit off and on for the showcase supervisors

“ontextC” – Technical Diary 8

What happened so far?

After building a working signal chain with the vb.stretch~ external, I worked on fine-tuning some bugs that I had noticed in the patch, but so far had not been given priority treatment because the signal chain had not been fully functional previously. This included adjusting the filter indexes in the parametric EQ to reflect the features I wanted for my production process (1 – low shelf, high pass, 2 – bell, 3 – bell, 4 – high shelf, low pass), correcting the units and patching in the pitch shift unit to reflect semitone and cent adjustments separately, and implementing a line object on the reverb faders to remove crackling while changing a parameter. Then I started working on the patch in presentation mode to represent only the parts of it which I also wanted accessible during my production process. To do this, I worked with my initial sketch from the first semester, the GUI capabilities within Max and Max4Live for cross referencing the result. I also tried to somewhat make the signal flow (in series) clear through the interface, but it definitely still needs some cleaning up. This necessity was also reflected during my first testing session with a Max4Live export in Ableton Live, but it was good to see that the parameter selection was already working quite well for my production process, as I had hoped. I also managed to set up a simple preset function (but I am hoping to advance that as well with proper dropdown menu presets).

Rudimentary GUI loosely based on my original sketch, using internal Max GUI tools.

Ongoing

Off the basis of this patch, I am starting to plan out the look and feel of the exhibit version, where only one parameter will be adjustable (probably the stretch factor). Considerations for this endeavour are: usability, how playback of the source sound and the processed sound should be triggered, an index number for survey content and a volume adjustment to cater to individual hearing sensitivity.

Results and Reflection

This stage of the process was very exciting! The testing stage made me remember why I had wanted to set out on this process in the first place, and it was very satisfying to hear the first working results playing back through my DAW. Since it was also my first time seriously working on a graphical user interfaces, that came with new challenges and insights, and I look forward to where my GUI research and testing will lead me.  

Objectives for Next Time

  • create mockup for exhibit version
  • figure out an effective play/stop mechanism for alternating between the processed and original sound
  • test GUI and figure out which changes to make in which order (also consider typography, style…)