<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_12_02_139243</id>
	<title>Google Abandoning Gears</title>
	<author>CmdrTaco</author>
	<datestamp>1259762160000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>harrymcc noted a story talking about what might be <a href="http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/technology/2009/11/google-gears.html">the end of Google Gears</a>.  The concept has always been interesting, but it seems that Google is beginning to think of Gears as more of a proof of concept, and that focus will shift to HTML5, which has the same functionality.</htmltext>
<tokenext>harrymcc noted a story talking about what might be the end of Google Gears .
The concept has always been interesting , but it seems that Google is beginning to think of Gears as more of a proof of concept , and that focus will shift to HTML5 , which has the same functionality .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>harrymcc noted a story talking about what might be the end of Google Gears.
The concept has always been interesting, but it seems that Google is beginning to think of Gears as more of a proof of concept, and that focus will shift to HTML5, which has the same functionality.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30302144</id>
	<title>Re:Offline apps</title>
	<author>Jonathan</author>
	<datestamp>1259574540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you don't use a laptop? Or do you have a 3G modem or something? That's the main point of Gears -- being able to edit a Google Docs document on a laptop without needing to find a wifi hotspot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you do n't use a laptop ?
Or do you have a 3G modem or something ?
That 's the main point of Gears -- being able to edit a Google Docs document on a laptop without needing to find a wifi hotspot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you don't use a laptop?
Or do you have a 3G modem or something?
That's the main point of Gears -- being able to edit a Google Docs document on a laptop without needing to find a wifi hotspot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992</id>
	<title>What about offline gmail?</title>
	<author>homunq</author>
	<datestamp>1259595120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Abandoning gears has been obvious for some time - for instance, there's no support in the linux version of Chrome. However, the question is, when willl existing google services based on Gears move to HTML5? The most important one of these being, of course, offline gmail. Google has demonstrated a mobile offline gmail prototype using HTML5 around the beginning of 2009, so the delay is hard to justify on a technical basis.</p><p>One wonders if they haven't made a policy decision not to support offline gmail - to force you to use the online, ad-containing version. If that is true, it would be yet another straw on the back of the "don't be evil" camel.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Abandoning gears has been obvious for some time - for instance , there 's no support in the linux version of Chrome .
However , the question is , when willl existing google services based on Gears move to HTML5 ?
The most important one of these being , of course , offline gmail .
Google has demonstrated a mobile offline gmail prototype using HTML5 around the beginning of 2009 , so the delay is hard to justify on a technical basis.One wonders if they have n't made a policy decision not to support offline gmail - to force you to use the online , ad-containing version .
If that is true , it would be yet another straw on the back of the " do n't be evil " camel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Abandoning gears has been obvious for some time - for instance, there's no support in the linux version of Chrome.
However, the question is, when willl existing google services based on Gears move to HTML5?
The most important one of these being, of course, offline gmail.
Google has demonstrated a mobile offline gmail prototype using HTML5 around the beginning of 2009, so the delay is hard to justify on a technical basis.One wonders if they haven't made a policy decision not to support offline gmail - to force you to use the online, ad-containing version.
If that is true, it would be yet another straw on the back of the "don't be evil" camel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296710</id>
	<title>makes sense</title>
	<author>fedorfedor</author>
	<datestamp>1259593320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Gears was a smart way to get important new features into stagnant older browsers (we're looking at you, IE...) and implemented far more quickly than any standards process allows.

Now that those features are in the HTML5 standard, there's no reason to require gears. Until the next round of feature-adding, of course...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gears was a smart way to get important new features into stagnant older browsers ( we 're looking at you , IE... ) and implemented far more quickly than any standards process allows .
Now that those features are in the HTML5 standard , there 's no reason to require gears .
Until the next round of feature-adding , of course.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gears was a smart way to get important new features into stagnant older browsers (we're looking at you, IE...) and implemented far more quickly than any standards process allows.
Now that those features are in the HTML5 standard, there's no reason to require gears.
Until the next round of feature-adding, of course...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30300722</id>
	<title>Re:Chrome OS</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1259612400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>From what I understood, Gears was the primary reason a computer with chrome OS is somewhat more useful than a brick when offline. Does this mean they'll have to allow real local applications for chrome OS now?</p></div></blockquote><p>No, it means that Google is planning on relying on HTML5 local storage (and related HTML5 features) to provide this functionality, instead of Gears.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I understood , Gears was the primary reason a computer with chrome OS is somewhat more useful than a brick when offline .
Does this mean they 'll have to allow real local applications for chrome OS now ? No , it means that Google is planning on relying on HTML5 local storage ( and related HTML5 features ) to provide this functionality , instead of Gears .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I understood, Gears was the primary reason a computer with chrome OS is somewhat more useful than a brick when offline.
Does this mean they'll have to allow real local applications for chrome OS now?No, it means that Google is planning on relying on HTML5 local storage (and related HTML5 features) to provide this functionality, instead of Gears.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298268</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296822</id>
	<title>As long as I can still have offline Gmail...</title>
	<author>madsci1016</author>
	<datestamp>1259594040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>...I won't really miss Gears. Since right now Offline Gmail uses Gears, I don't want it to go away.</htmltext>
<tokenext>...I wo n't really miss Gears .
Since right now Offline Gmail uses Gears , I do n't want it to go away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...I won't really miss Gears.
Since right now Offline Gmail uses Gears, I don't want it to go away.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296890</id>
	<title>Great news</title>
	<author>FrankDerKte</author>
	<datestamp>1259594460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Google has created a technology to adress the shortcomings of an old standard and now, as the new one reaches it's final state, Google tells us to use it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Google has created a technology to adress the shortcomings of an old standard and now , as the new one reaches it 's final state , Google tells us to use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Google has created a technology to adress the shortcomings of an old standard and now, as the new one reaches it's final state, Google tells us to use it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297512</id>
	<title>Re:BLOAT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259597760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree, that's why Flash is such a great idea. Instead of browser developers being bogged down fixing its multitude of problems, they just have to pester Adobe for a few years.</p><p>Seriously though, Adobe just announced that while Flash on Windows will support GPU acceleration, the OS X version will not (and I suspect neither will the Linux version). Adobe might take years to add a feature that Apple have already implemented for Safari's HTML engine (using the Quicktime library). Scripting means a single point of closed source failure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree , that 's why Flash is such a great idea .
Instead of browser developers being bogged down fixing its multitude of problems , they just have to pester Adobe for a few years.Seriously though , Adobe just announced that while Flash on Windows will support GPU acceleration , the OS X version will not ( and I suspect neither will the Linux version ) .
Adobe might take years to add a feature that Apple have already implemented for Safari 's HTML engine ( using the Quicktime library ) .
Scripting means a single point of closed source failure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree, that's why Flash is such a great idea.
Instead of browser developers being bogged down fixing its multitude of problems, they just have to pester Adobe for a few years.Seriously though, Adobe just announced that while Flash on Windows will support GPU acceleration, the OS X version will not (and I suspect neither will the Linux version).
Adobe might take years to add a feature that Apple have already implemented for Safari's HTML engine (using the Quicktime library).
Scripting means a single point of closed source failure.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297228</id>
	<title>Re:HTML 5</title>
	<author>Transfinite</author>
	<datestamp>1259596440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>you're right... but. your missing the point. the important, ground breaking changes are not the tags or even for that matter the video elemen, these are all distractions. It's the other stuff like. WebWorkers, webSockets, ApplicationCache etc... This is the important stuff.

Really go read the specs</htmltext>
<tokenext>you 're right... but. your missing the point .
the important , ground breaking changes are not the tags or even for that matter the video elemen , these are all distractions .
It 's the other stuff like .
WebWorkers , webSockets , ApplicationCache etc... This is the important stuff .
Really go read the specs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>you're right... but. your missing the point.
the important, ground breaking changes are not the tags or even for that matter the video elemen, these are all distractions.
It's the other stuff like.
WebWorkers, webSockets, ApplicationCache etc... This is the important stuff.
Really go read the specs</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30307104</id>
	<title>Re:BLOAT</title>
	<author>jipn4</author>
	<datestamp>1259598300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times, more failure points, and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider.</i></p><p>What utter bullshit.  HTML5 doesn't "push functionality [from scripts] into the browser", it provides standards and functionality that cannot be provided in scripts.  Scripts can't do video decoding.  Scripts can't do geolocation.  Scripts can't create a canvas.  Scripts can't even provide new input element types (they can do the validation, but they can't communicate portably to the browser what it is they are doing).</p><p><i> It's a fountain of whale guts, metaphorically speaking.</i></p><p>Your brain is whale guts, metaphorically speaking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times , more failure points , and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider.What utter bullshit .
HTML5 does n't " push functionality [ from scripts ] into the browser " , it provides standards and functionality that can not be provided in scripts .
Scripts ca n't do video decoding .
Scripts ca n't do geolocation .
Scripts ca n't create a canvas .
Scripts ca n't even provide new input element types ( they can do the validation , but they ca n't communicate portably to the browser what it is they are doing ) .
It 's a fountain of whale guts , metaphorically speaking.Your brain is whale guts , metaphorically speaking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times, more failure points, and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider.What utter bullshit.
HTML5 doesn't "push functionality [from scripts] into the browser", it provides standards and functionality that cannot be provided in scripts.
Scripts can't do video decoding.
Scripts can't do geolocation.
Scripts can't create a canvas.
Scripts can't even provide new input element types (they can do the validation, but they can't communicate portably to the browser what it is they are doing).
It's a fountain of whale guts, metaphorically speaking.Your brain is whale guts, metaphorically speaking.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30299956</id>
	<title>Re:Offline apps</title>
	<author>lwsimon</author>
	<datestamp>1259608680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The couple of times I looked into Gears, the main feature touted by Google was the ability to use your web apps when you're not connected to the internet. This was reason enough for me not to spend a lot of energy on Gears, as in practice, in this day and age, I never find a computer that is NOT connected to the internet.</p><p>So in short, I've never had a need for Gears.</p></div><p>You don't think this will change as we move to more and more powerful mobile computing platforms?  Already, my iPhone runs into issues at times when the network isn't available - when WLAN netbook/tablets/retinal implants drop from the network, this type of tech will be key.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The couple of times I looked into Gears , the main feature touted by Google was the ability to use your web apps when you 're not connected to the internet .
This was reason enough for me not to spend a lot of energy on Gears , as in practice , in this day and age , I never find a computer that is NOT connected to the internet.So in short , I 've never had a need for Gears.You do n't think this will change as we move to more and more powerful mobile computing platforms ?
Already , my iPhone runs into issues at times when the network is n't available - when WLAN netbook/tablets/retinal implants drop from the network , this type of tech will be key .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The couple of times I looked into Gears, the main feature touted by Google was the ability to use your web apps when you're not connected to the internet.
This was reason enough for me not to spend a lot of energy on Gears, as in practice, in this day and age, I never find a computer that is NOT connected to the internet.So in short, I've never had a need for Gears.You don't think this will change as we move to more and more powerful mobile computing platforms?
Already, my iPhone runs into issues at times when the network isn't available - when WLAN netbook/tablets/retinal implants drop from the network, this type of tech will be key.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297832</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296854</id>
	<title>Re:BLOAT</title>
	<author>bunratty</author>
	<datestamp>1259594220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>You're right. I think we've all taken the wrong approach with huge, bloated standard libraries. Let all developers write all code from scratch. Need to output an integer, just write the code that turns the integer into a stream of characters, then pass that stream of characters into your homebrew I/O functions, which pass them off to your custom built drivers. There's no need for all languages to have this functionality! It just makes developers have to code around the differences and bugs in each runtime!</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're right .
I think we 've all taken the wrong approach with huge , bloated standard libraries .
Let all developers write all code from scratch .
Need to output an integer , just write the code that turns the integer into a stream of characters , then pass that stream of characters into your homebrew I/O functions , which pass them off to your custom built drivers .
There 's no need for all languages to have this functionality !
It just makes developers have to code around the differences and bugs in each runtime !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're right.
I think we've all taken the wrong approach with huge, bloated standard libraries.
Let all developers write all code from scratch.
Need to output an integer, just write the code that turns the integer into a stream of characters, then pass that stream of characters into your homebrew I/O functions, which pass them off to your custom built drivers.
There's no need for all languages to have this functionality!
It just makes developers have to code around the differences and bugs in each runtime!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30303708</id>
	<title>Re:Summary is not accurate</title>
	<author>dov\_0</author>
	<datestamp>1259579280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hopefully a lot of other things will be retired along with Gears. We can only hope that the webdevs of the world retire Javascript and the host of other stop-gaps that make our web and our browsers so heavy.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hopefully a lot of other things will be retired along with Gears .
We can only hope that the webdevs of the world retire Javascript and the host of other stop-gaps that make our web and our browsers so heavy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hopefully a lot of other things will be retired along with Gears.
We can only hope that the webdevs of the world retire Javascript and the host of other stop-gaps that make our web and our browsers so heavy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296820</id>
	<title>Re:HTML 5</title>
	<author>slim</author>
	<datestamp>1259593980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HTML 5 does exactly what it says it does.</p><p><a href="http://www.diveintohtml5.org/detect.html" title="diveintohtml5.org">Dive into HTML 5</a> [diveintohtml5.org] tells you what that is, and whether your browser supports it.</p><p>It's up to developers to apply it. Google is doing so.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HTML 5 does exactly what it says it does.Dive into HTML 5 [ diveintohtml5.org ] tells you what that is , and whether your browser supports it.It 's up to developers to apply it .
Google is doing so .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HTML 5 does exactly what it says it does.Dive into HTML 5 [diveintohtml5.org] tells you what that is, and whether your browser supports it.It's up to developers to apply it.
Google is doing so.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30300734</id>
	<title>Gears?!!</title>
	<author>PPH</author>
	<datestamp>1259612520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Gears went out of favor after Babbage's Difference Engine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Gears went out of favor after Babbage 's Difference Engine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gears went out of favor after Babbage's Difference Engine.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297524</id>
	<title>Re:What about offline gmail?</title>
	<author>Ma8thew</author>
	<datestamp>1259597820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since the iPhone version of GMail already uses HTML5 for offline access, I assume so will the desktop version.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since the iPhone version of GMail already uses HTML5 for offline access , I assume so will the desktop version .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since the iPhone version of GMail already uses HTML5 for offline access, I assume so will the desktop version.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297072</id>
	<title>Re:What about offline gmail?</title>
	<author>ickleberry</author>
	<datestamp>1259595780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>what's wrong with using an ordinary email client? or are you also stuck on the 'Everything over HTTP' bandwagon?</htmltext>
<tokenext>what 's wrong with using an ordinary email client ?
or are you also stuck on the 'Everything over HTTP ' bandwagon ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>what's wrong with using an ordinary email client?
or are you also stuck on the 'Everything over HTTP' bandwagon?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297128</id>
	<title>the only reason I'll miss gears</title>
	<author>spyrochaete</author>
	<datestamp>1259595960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had poor luck successfully using Google Docs offline, even though this was supposedly what Gears was made for.  I still do find Gears useful for one thing - Wordpress.  I obviously can't blog offline, and if I were writing a post offline I'd do it in Microsoft Live Writer or MS Word or something, but regardless, that's not how Wordpress uses Gears; it leverages Gears to cache common Javascript files locally so that the pages on the admin console load much more quickly.  This makes complex procedures really painless - like when I have to switch between many pages on the admin console, such as when I'm tweaking a series of templates or testing incremental changes to a plugin.</p><p>I'm no web designer so perhaps I'm misunderstanding TFA, but is offline script caching one of the features of HTML5?  I really love this feature for frequently viewed web apps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had poor luck successfully using Google Docs offline , even though this was supposedly what Gears was made for .
I still do find Gears useful for one thing - Wordpress .
I obviously ca n't blog offline , and if I were writing a post offline I 'd do it in Microsoft Live Writer or MS Word or something , but regardless , that 's not how Wordpress uses Gears ; it leverages Gears to cache common Javascript files locally so that the pages on the admin console load much more quickly .
This makes complex procedures really painless - like when I have to switch between many pages on the admin console , such as when I 'm tweaking a series of templates or testing incremental changes to a plugin.I 'm no web designer so perhaps I 'm misunderstanding TFA , but is offline script caching one of the features of HTML5 ?
I really love this feature for frequently viewed web apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had poor luck successfully using Google Docs offline, even though this was supposedly what Gears was made for.
I still do find Gears useful for one thing - Wordpress.
I obviously can't blog offline, and if I were writing a post offline I'd do it in Microsoft Live Writer or MS Word or something, but regardless, that's not how Wordpress uses Gears; it leverages Gears to cache common Javascript files locally so that the pages on the admin console load much more quickly.
This makes complex procedures really painless - like when I have to switch between many pages on the admin console, such as when I'm tweaking a series of templates or testing incremental changes to a plugin.I'm no web designer so perhaps I'm misunderstanding TFA, but is offline script caching one of the features of HTML5?
I really love this feature for frequently viewed web apps.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30423348</id>
	<title>Re:HTML 5</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1260727140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I&rsquo;m sorry??</p><p>I bet you are one of those &ldquo;web developers&rdquo; who &ldquo;learned&rdquo; it by reading a book while driving a cab, and know think you know everything.</p><p>XHTML was created, to finally put an end to the retarded mess that is HTML, and to have something <em>professional</em>. It was made, so that &mdash; just like with every other real compiler/interpreter &mdash; every time you fuck up, it fails to render the site at all, and shows you the error(s).<br>If you can&rsquo;t handle that, you should not write websites in the first place!</p><p>The only thing that HTML4s forgiveness brought us, is a messy trash of a non-standard with huge interpreters trying to make sense of that crap you call HTML.<br>Boy was I happy that there was no XHTML 1.1 <em>Transitional</em>.</p><p>You have it the wrong way: Actually, nobody cares what those websites still are written in. It being built into the browser, does not mean you have to use it!</p><p>What it means, is that we <em>professionals</em> have a <em>professional</em> language, to do <em>professional</em> things! Not your spaghetti code shit! Which saves us time, and lets us work like <em>professionals</em>!</p><p>I have worked in that area since 2000. And I was one of the best in the world. I wrote AJAX, two years before the term or the API were even invented. And I want HTML (without the X) to DIE, DIE, and DIE!<br>Everyone who complains about strictness being useless, shall get a huge slap right in the face!</p><p>I hope I never have to use a site that is vomited out of your brain!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I    m sorry ?
? I bet you are one of those    web developers    who    learned    it by reading a book while driving a cab , and know think you know everything.XHTML was created , to finally put an end to the retarded mess that is HTML , and to have something professional .
It was made , so that    just like with every other real compiler/interpreter    every time you fuck up , it fails to render the site at all , and shows you the error ( s ) .If you can    t handle that , you should not write websites in the first place ! The only thing that HTML4s forgiveness brought us , is a messy trash of a non-standard with huge interpreters trying to make sense of that crap you call HTML.Boy was I happy that there was no XHTML 1.1 Transitional.You have it the wrong way : Actually , nobody cares what those websites still are written in .
It being built into the browser , does not mean you have to use it ! What it means , is that we professionals have a professional language , to do professional things !
Not your spaghetti code shit !
Which saves us time , and lets us work like professionals ! I have worked in that area since 2000 .
And I was one of the best in the world .
I wrote AJAX , two years before the term or the API were even invented .
And I want HTML ( without the X ) to DIE , DIE , and DIE ! Everyone who complains about strictness being useless , shall get a huge slap right in the face ! I hope I never have to use a site that is vomited out of your brain !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I’m sorry?
?I bet you are one of those “web developers” who “learned” it by reading a book while driving a cab, and know think you know everything.XHTML was created, to finally put an end to the retarded mess that is HTML, and to have something professional.
It was made, so that — just like with every other real compiler/interpreter — every time you fuck up, it fails to render the site at all, and shows you the error(s).If you can’t handle that, you should not write websites in the first place!The only thing that HTML4s forgiveness brought us, is a messy trash of a non-standard with huge interpreters trying to make sense of that crap you call HTML.Boy was I happy that there was no XHTML 1.1 Transitional.You have it the wrong way: Actually, nobody cares what those websites still are written in.
It being built into the browser, does not mean you have to use it!What it means, is that we professionals have a professional language, to do professional things!
Not your spaghetti code shit!
Which saves us time, and lets us work like professionals!I have worked in that area since 2000.
And I was one of the best in the world.
I wrote AJAX, two years before the term or the API were even invented.
And I want HTML (without the X) to DIE, DIE, and DIE!Everyone who complains about strictness being useless, shall get a huge slap right in the face!I hope I never have to use a site that is vomited out of your brain!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297216</id>
	<title>Time to ...</title>
	<author>PePe242</author>
	<datestamp>1259596380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>shift gear</htmltext>
<tokenext>shift gear</tokentext>
<sentencetext>shift gear</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297832</id>
	<title>Offline apps</title>
	<author>jeroen94704</author>
	<datestamp>1259599380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The couple of times I looked into Gears, the main feature touted by Google was the ability to use your web apps when you're not connected to the internet. This was reason enough for me not to spend a lot of energy on Gears, as in practice, in this day and age, I never find a computer that is NOT connected to the internet.<br>
<br>
So in short, I've never had a need for Gears.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The couple of times I looked into Gears , the main feature touted by Google was the ability to use your web apps when you 're not connected to the internet .
This was reason enough for me not to spend a lot of energy on Gears , as in practice , in this day and age , I never find a computer that is NOT connected to the internet .
So in short , I 've never had a need for Gears .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The couple of times I looked into Gears, the main feature touted by Google was the ability to use your web apps when you're not connected to the internet.
This was reason enough for me not to spend a lot of energy on Gears, as in practice, in this day and age, I never find a computer that is NOT connected to the internet.
So in short, I've never had a need for Gears.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298258</id>
	<title>Re:BLOAT</title>
	<author>slimjim8094</author>
	<datestamp>1259601300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No. This is essentially an extension of the cookie.</p><p>The web has changed. I don't like a lot of the changes, but this is one of the good ones. Actually, most of HTML5 is a great idea. Would you rather rely on Quicktime and Flash to do everything in the standard? I sure don't.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No .
This is essentially an extension of the cookie.The web has changed .
I do n't like a lot of the changes , but this is one of the good ones .
Actually , most of HTML5 is a great idea .
Would you rather rely on Quicktime and Flash to do everything in the standard ?
I sure do n't .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No.
This is essentially an extension of the cookie.The web has changed.
I don't like a lot of the changes, but this is one of the good ones.
Actually, most of HTML5 is a great idea.
Would you rather rely on Quicktime and Flash to do everything in the standard?
I sure don't.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30299334</id>
	<title>JavaScript speed wars</title>
	<author>PCM2</author>
	<datestamp>1259605920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the more overlooked features of Gears is its JavaScript parser, which allows apps to execute JavaScript in a separate thread from the rest of the page to improve performance. Now that Google has released Chrome, it makes less sense for it to keep working on a hack to allow Firefox and IE to run JavaScript more efficiently. Chrome is incentive enough for Mozilla and Microsoft to start doing that for themselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the more overlooked features of Gears is its JavaScript parser , which allows apps to execute JavaScript in a separate thread from the rest of the page to improve performance .
Now that Google has released Chrome , it makes less sense for it to keep working on a hack to allow Firefox and IE to run JavaScript more efficiently .
Chrome is incentive enough for Mozilla and Microsoft to start doing that for themselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the more overlooked features of Gears is its JavaScript parser, which allows apps to execute JavaScript in a separate thread from the rest of the page to improve performance.
Now that Google has released Chrome, it makes less sense for it to keep working on a hack to allow Firefox and IE to run JavaScript more efficiently.
Chrome is incentive enough for Mozilla and Microsoft to start doing that for themselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30300828</id>
	<title>does this mean</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259612820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>does this mean I can't save my content on google locally any more, and access it off line?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>does this mean I ca n't save my content on google locally any more , and access it off line ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>does this mean I can't save my content on google locally any more, and access it off line?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30301056</id>
	<title>Re:What about offline gmail?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259613960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><i> If that is true, it would be yet another straw on the back of the "don't be evil" camel. </i> <br> <br>

That camel is a, um, straw man or beast to begin with. "Don't be evil" is not Google's central corporate motto, it's part of a remark in the section of the corporate home page where business practices are described. Others have taken that snippet out of all proportion. Google is just another big company; it doesn't pretend to be anything else, and it's a fairly well behaved one (even generally beneficial in some respects). <br> <br>

Others pointed out the indications that offline Gmail continues. (I'll start using Gmail again when they fix the b0rked threading. As it is now, random "Re:" and similar local reply indicators in Subject fields can't be filtered/stripped and break the threading, the central idea in the interface. No reply to feedback either. *sigh*)</htmltext>
<tokenext>If that is true , it would be yet another straw on the back of the " do n't be evil " camel .
That camel is a , um , straw man or beast to begin with .
" Do n't be evil " is not Google 's central corporate motto , it 's part of a remark in the section of the corporate home page where business practices are described .
Others have taken that snippet out of all proportion .
Google is just another big company ; it does n't pretend to be anything else , and it 's a fairly well behaved one ( even generally beneficial in some respects ) .
Others pointed out the indications that offline Gmail continues .
( I 'll start using Gmail again when they fix the b0rked threading .
As it is now , random " Re : " and similar local reply indicators in Subject fields ca n't be filtered/stripped and break the threading , the central idea in the interface .
No reply to feedback either .
* sigh * )</tokentext>
<sentencetext> If that is true, it would be yet another straw on the back of the "don't be evil" camel.
That camel is a, um, straw man or beast to begin with.
"Don't be evil" is not Google's central corporate motto, it's part of a remark in the section of the corporate home page where business practices are described.
Others have taken that snippet out of all proportion.
Google is just another big company; it doesn't pretend to be anything else, and it's a fairly well behaved one (even generally beneficial in some respects).
Others pointed out the indications that offline Gmail continues.
(I'll start using Gmail again when they fix the b0rked threading.
As it is now, random "Re:" and similar local reply indicators in Subject fields can't be filtered/stripped and break the threading, the central idea in the interface.
No reply to feedback either.
*sigh*)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296778</id>
	<title>Re:HTML 5</title>
	<author>AvitarX</author>
	<datestamp>1259593800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm pretty thrilled with what came out of AJAX myself.</p><p>Just google maps alone makes it well worth it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm pretty thrilled with what came out of AJAX myself.Just google maps alone makes it well worth it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm pretty thrilled with what came out of AJAX myself.Just google maps alone makes it well worth it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297034</id>
	<title>Google hates anything that is offline</title>
	<author>alen</author>
	<datestamp>1259595420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>event the iphone app is just a front for the website. For Google Reader I use MobileRSS that downloads the first few lines of my feeds so i can read them offline in the NYC subway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>event the iphone app is just a front for the website .
For Google Reader I use MobileRSS that downloads the first few lines of my feeds so i can read them offline in the NYC subway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>event the iphone app is just a front for the website.
For Google Reader I use MobileRSS that downloads the first few lines of my feeds so i can read them offline in the NYC subway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754</id>
	<title>BLOAT</title>
	<author>BadAnalogyGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1259593620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On a beach in Mexico a whale beached itself. It's buoyant fatty body crushed the whale's lungs and suffocated it in the wide open air. Bacteria from the whale's intestines began to multiply and ferment and large amounts of gas accumulated in the whale's body. Soon a bulge was visible around the belly of the whale. Then the bulge grew until the whole carcass was bloated.</p><p>One day, the whale's rotting body broke and released the gas in a giant explosion.</p><p>Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times, more failure points, and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider. It's a fountain of whale guts, metaphorically speaking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On a beach in Mexico a whale beached itself .
It 's buoyant fatty body crushed the whale 's lungs and suffocated it in the wide open air .
Bacteria from the whale 's intestines began to multiply and ferment and large amounts of gas accumulated in the whale 's body .
Soon a bulge was visible around the belly of the whale .
Then the bulge grew until the whole carcass was bloated.One day , the whale 's rotting body broke and released the gas in a giant explosion.Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times , more failure points , and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider .
It 's a fountain of whale guts , metaphorically speaking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On a beach in Mexico a whale beached itself.
It's buoyant fatty body crushed the whale's lungs and suffocated it in the wide open air.
Bacteria from the whale's intestines began to multiply and ferment and large amounts of gas accumulated in the whale's body.
Soon a bulge was visible around the belly of the whale.
Then the bulge grew until the whole carcass was bloated.One day, the whale's rotting body broke and released the gas in a giant explosion.Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times, more failure points, and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider.
It's a fountain of whale guts, metaphorically speaking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296702</id>
	<title>Summary is not accurate</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259593320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Saying that Google is abandoning Gears is not 100\% accurate as it has bad connotations.</p><p>Google created Gears to fill the void until browser makers would implement HTML5. Now that they are doing so, Gears is being retired.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Saying that Google is abandoning Gears is not 100 \ % accurate as it has bad connotations.Google created Gears to fill the void until browser makers would implement HTML5 .
Now that they are doing so , Gears is being retired .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Saying that Google is abandoning Gears is not 100\% accurate as it has bad connotations.Google created Gears to fill the void until browser makers would implement HTML5.
Now that they are doing so, Gears is being retired.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30299296</id>
	<title>Re:What about offline gmail?</title>
	<author>PCM2</author>
	<datestamp>1259605680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Abandoning gears has been obvious for some time - for instance, there's no support in the linux version of Chrome.</p></div><p>That's hardly a fair complaint, considering Chrome for Linux is <a href="http://www.google.com/chrome/intl/en/linux.html" title="google.com">not supported</a> [google.com], either (yet).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Abandoning gears has been obvious for some time - for instance , there 's no support in the linux version of Chrome.That 's hardly a fair complaint , considering Chrome for Linux is not supported [ google.com ] , either ( yet ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Abandoning gears has been obvious for some time - for instance, there's no support in the linux version of Chrome.That's hardly a fair complaint, considering Chrome for Linux is not supported [google.com], either (yet).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296680</id>
	<title>wave</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259593140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that's the reason</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that 's the reason</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that's the reason</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298434</id>
	<title>Re:What about offline gmail?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259602140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You are a massive idiot and asshole.</p><p>"Forcing" you to use the online version of a free service so that there is a chance to display ads is not evil.  It's not even remotely evil.  It's not bad.  It's not wrong.</p><p>You are a greedy shit.  I would think that's actually evil.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You are a massive idiot and asshole .
" Forcing " you to use the online version of a free service so that there is a chance to display ads is not evil .
It 's not even remotely evil .
It 's not bad .
It 's not wrong.You are a greedy shit .
I would think that 's actually evil .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are a massive idiot and asshole.
"Forcing" you to use the online version of a free service so that there is a chance to display ads is not evil.
It's not even remotely evil.
It's not bad.
It's not wrong.You are a greedy shit.
I would think that's actually evil.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296872</id>
	<title>Re:HTML 5</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1259594340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Read the spec, compare it with browser implementations.  A few things are deployed and work well now, such as the video and audio tags in FireFox and Safari (although they support different CODECs out of the box) and client-side storage.  The latter is the big one that Gears provided; with HTML 5 there are existing implementations of both the JavaScript persistent object storage and the database-style version (which lets you run SQL queries against a local store).  Most of the new form elements are already supported by Gecko and WebKit and Canvas (which allows drawing on a PostScript-style model) has been working in both for ages.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Read the spec , compare it with browser implementations .
A few things are deployed and work well now , such as the video and audio tags in FireFox and Safari ( although they support different CODECs out of the box ) and client-side storage .
The latter is the big one that Gears provided ; with HTML 5 there are existing implementations of both the JavaScript persistent object storage and the database-style version ( which lets you run SQL queries against a local store ) .
Most of the new form elements are already supported by Gecko and WebKit and Canvas ( which allows drawing on a PostScript-style model ) has been working in both for ages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Read the spec, compare it with browser implementations.
A few things are deployed and work well now, such as the video and audio tags in FireFox and Safari (although they support different CODECs out of the box) and client-side storage.
The latter is the big one that Gears provided; with HTML 5 there are existing implementations of both the JavaScript persistent object storage and the database-style version (which lets you run SQL queries against a local store).
Most of the new form elements are already supported by Gecko and WebKit and Canvas (which allows drawing on a PostScript-style model) has been working in both for ages.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30299878</id>
	<title>Re:What about offline gmail?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259608260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I like the gmail interface. I like not having to remember to sync my email before I lose my internet, and without having an extra app always running in the background. I like having the same interface for when I'm computing from the cloud (on a public computer) or from home. I do not like fiddling with the settings and updates of yet another app.</p><p>Sure, email clients work. But they are not the same as offline gmail.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I like the gmail interface .
I like not having to remember to sync my email before I lose my internet , and without having an extra app always running in the background .
I like having the same interface for when I 'm computing from the cloud ( on a public computer ) or from home .
I do not like fiddling with the settings and updates of yet another app.Sure , email clients work .
But they are not the same as offline gmail .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I like the gmail interface.
I like not having to remember to sync my email before I lose my internet, and without having an extra app always running in the background.
I like having the same interface for when I'm computing from the cloud (on a public computer) or from home.
I do not like fiddling with the settings and updates of yet another app.Sure, email clients work.
But they are not the same as offline gmail.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297072</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298656</id>
	<title>I'm still waiting for the Linux Gears!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259603160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Evil Evil Evil!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Evil Evil Evil !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Evil Evil Evil!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297496</id>
	<title>Re:HTML 5</title>
	<author>foniksonik</author>
	<datestamp>1259597700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Web sites that want to support it and also support legacy browsers will use something like <a href="http://www.modernizr.com/" title="modernizr.com">Modernizr</a> [modernizr.com] or <a href="http://www.diveintohtml5.org/" title="diveintohtml5.org">other HTML5 detection techniques</a> [diveintohtml5.org] and provide alternate content - like flash video as alternate content for HTML5 video, javascript or flash charts as alt content for canvas charts, etc.</p><p>Some features like sockets and web workers and local storage aren't really feasible for legacy browsers even with workarounds like Gears but a subset can be implemented for specific apps which is the focus of this topic....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Web sites that want to support it and also support legacy browsers will use something like Modernizr [ modernizr.com ] or other HTML5 detection techniques [ diveintohtml5.org ] and provide alternate content - like flash video as alternate content for HTML5 video , javascript or flash charts as alt content for canvas charts , etc.Some features like sockets and web workers and local storage are n't really feasible for legacy browsers even with workarounds like Gears but a subset can be implemented for specific apps which is the focus of this topic... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Web sites that want to support it and also support legacy browsers will use something like Modernizr [modernizr.com] or other HTML5 detection techniques [diveintohtml5.org] and provide alternate content - like flash video as alternate content for HTML5 video, javascript or flash charts as alt content for canvas charts, etc.Some features like sockets and web workers and local storage aren't really feasible for legacy browsers even with workarounds like Gears but a subset can be implemented for specific apps which is the focus of this topic....</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297122</id>
	<title>Re:HTML 5</title>
	<author>Blakey Rat</author>
	<datestamp>1259595960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HTML5 is pretty slick, but you have to remember most sites will never upgrade to it.</p><p>One of the problems with the web is whenever you add a new markup, you still have to support the old markup. One of the reasons I thought that XHTML was mostly a waste of time was that everybody involved in it was acting like a year after XHTML2 came out, HTML2,3,4 would instantly disappear and browsers could simplify their parsing, becoming faster... the reality is, the vast majority of sites will never switch over.</p><p>HTML5 is a better idea, since at least it's not a completely new way of doing things. But since it does the few things XHTML did that HTML 4 didn't, now browsers have to support a totally useless XHTML strict syntax in addition.</p><p>Ugh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HTML5 is pretty slick , but you have to remember most sites will never upgrade to it.One of the problems with the web is whenever you add a new markup , you still have to support the old markup .
One of the reasons I thought that XHTML was mostly a waste of time was that everybody involved in it was acting like a year after XHTML2 came out , HTML2,3,4 would instantly disappear and browsers could simplify their parsing , becoming faster... the reality is , the vast majority of sites will never switch over.HTML5 is a better idea , since at least it 's not a completely new way of doing things .
But since it does the few things XHTML did that HTML 4 did n't , now browsers have to support a totally useless XHTML strict syntax in addition.Ugh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HTML5 is pretty slick, but you have to remember most sites will never upgrade to it.One of the problems with the web is whenever you add a new markup, you still have to support the old markup.
One of the reasons I thought that XHTML was mostly a waste of time was that everybody involved in it was acting like a year after XHTML2 came out, HTML2,3,4 would instantly disappear and browsers could simplify their parsing, becoming faster... the reality is, the vast majority of sites will never switch over.HTML5 is a better idea, since at least it's not a completely new way of doing things.
But since it does the few things XHTML did that HTML 4 didn't, now browsers have to support a totally useless XHTML strict syntax in addition.Ugh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297688</id>
	<title>Re:HTML 5</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259598540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Past experience in what? Something entirely unrelated? Have you even bothered to read up on some of the features? It's not hype, and in fact most of it is already here. Check out a modern browser (firefox 3.5+, chrome, etc) and see for yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Past experience in what ?
Something entirely unrelated ?
Have you even bothered to read up on some of the features ?
It 's not hype , and in fact most of it is already here .
Check out a modern browser ( firefox 3.5 + , chrome , etc ) and see for yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Past experience in what?
Something entirely unrelated?
Have you even bothered to read up on some of the features?
It's not hype, and in fact most of it is already here.
Check out a modern browser (firefox 3.5+, chrome, etc) and see for yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297064</id>
	<title>Hey Google,</title>
	<author>nixtanatos</author>
	<datestamp>1259595660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Come to the Dark Side of the Force.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Come to the Dark Side of the Force .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come to the Dark Side of the Force.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298268</id>
	<title>Chrome OS</title>
	<author>ZankerH</author>
	<datestamp>1259601360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>From what I understood, Gears was the primary reason a computer with chrome OS is somewhat more useful than a brick when offline. Does this mean they'll have to allow real local applications for chrome OS now?</htmltext>
<tokenext>From what I understood , Gears was the primary reason a computer with chrome OS is somewhat more useful than a brick when offline .
Does this mean they 'll have to allow real local applications for chrome OS now ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From what I understood, Gears was the primary reason a computer with chrome OS is somewhat more useful than a brick when offline.
Does this mean they'll have to allow real local applications for chrome OS now?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296858</id>
	<title>Re:Summary is not accurate</title>
	<author>Colonel Korn</author>
	<datestamp>1259594280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Saying that Google is abandoning Gears is not 100\% accurate as it has bad connotations.</p><p>Google created Gears to fill the void until browser makers would implement HTML5. Now that they are doing so, Gears is being retired.</p></div><p>Afghanistan was meant to fill the void until war makers would implement Operation Relax Because the Next Election Is Three Years Away.  Now that they are doing so, Afghanistan is being retired.

Offtopic?  Troll?  Funny?  You be the judge!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Saying that Google is abandoning Gears is not 100 \ % accurate as it has bad connotations.Google created Gears to fill the void until browser makers would implement HTML5 .
Now that they are doing so , Gears is being retired.Afghanistan was meant to fill the void until war makers would implement Operation Relax Because the Next Election Is Three Years Away .
Now that they are doing so , Afghanistan is being retired .
Offtopic ? Troll ?
Funny ? You be the judge !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Saying that Google is abandoning Gears is not 100\% accurate as it has bad connotations.Google created Gears to fill the void until browser makers would implement HTML5.
Now that they are doing so, Gears is being retired.Afghanistan was meant to fill the void until war makers would implement Operation Relax Because the Next Election Is Three Years Away.
Now that they are doing so, Afghanistan is being retired.
Offtopic?  Troll?
Funny?  You be the judge!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736</id>
	<title>HTML 5</title>
	<author>jo42</author>
	<datestamp>1259593500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Makes one wonder how much of this "HTML 5 will do this", "HTML 5 will do that" is hype or wishful thinking. Past experience has shown great disappointment in all this hyperbole...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Makes one wonder how much of this " HTML 5 will do this " , " HTML 5 will do that " is hype or wishful thinking .
Past experience has shown great disappointment in all this hyperbole.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Makes one wonder how much of this "HTML 5 will do this", "HTML 5 will do that" is hype or wishful thinking.
Past experience has shown great disappointment in all this hyperbole...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296834</id>
	<title>Re:Summary is not accurate</title>
	<author>Enderandrew</author>
	<datestamp>1259594100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What about offline caching?</p><p>I thought that was part of Chrome OS so that it can still be used offline?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What about offline caching ? I thought that was part of Chrome OS so that it can still be used offline ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What about offline caching?I thought that was part of Chrome OS so that it can still be used offline?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296702</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297470</id>
	<title>Interesting idea of the day -1</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259597520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'd been toying with the idea of making my existing webapp available offline, and just this morning began reading up on Google Gears to use it. I put the documentation down for a minute to check out<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. and what do I see? Well, fuck.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'd been toying with the idea of making my existing webapp available offline , and just this morning began reading up on Google Gears to use it .
I put the documentation down for a minute to check out / .
and what do I see ?
Well , fuck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'd been toying with the idea of making my existing webapp available offline, and just this morning began reading up on Google Gears to use it.
I put the documentation down for a minute to check out /.
and what do I see?
Well, fuck.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298850</id>
	<title>Re:BLOAT</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1259603940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times, more failure points, and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider.</p></div> </blockquote><p>This isn't true insofar as it is relevant to the issue at hand, and isn't relevant so far as it is true. First, HTML5 local storage doesn't push "functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting"; the browser functionality relies on JavaScript scripting. Second, because it pushes local storage for which there are demands and existing, but not common, implementations (like Gears) into a standard form (HTML5), it reduces disparate functionality among browsers.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times , more failure points , and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider .
This is n't true insofar as it is relevant to the issue at hand , and is n't relevant so far as it is true .
First , HTML5 local storage does n't push " functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting " ; the browser functionality relies on JavaScript scripting .
Second , because it pushes local storage for which there are demands and existing , but not common , implementations ( like Gears ) into a standard form ( HTML5 ) , it reduces disparate functionality among browsers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times, more failure points, and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider.
This isn't true insofar as it is relevant to the issue at hand, and isn't relevant so far as it is true.
First, HTML5 local storage doesn't push "functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting"; the browser functionality relies on JavaScript scripting.
Second, because it pushes local storage for which there are demands and existing, but not common, implementations (like Gears) into a standard form (HTML5), it reduces disparate functionality among browsers.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297338</id>
	<title>Re:BLOAT</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1259596860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times, more failure points, and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider.</p></div><p>...and interactive sites that don't require a whole page load every time you want to change the tiniest thing.  Yeah, so they're harder to develop (unless you're one of the 99.9\% of web programmers who use a library to handle the differences) but I can live with that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times , more failure points , and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider....and interactive sites that do n't require a whole page load every time you want to change the tiniest thing .
Yeah , so they 're harder to develop ( unless you 're one of the 99.9 \ % of web programmers who use a library to handle the differences ) but I can live with that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Pushing functionality into the browser instead of relying on scripting means longer launch times, more failure points, and more disparate functionality from browser to browser for developers to consider....and interactive sites that don't require a whole page load every time you want to change the tiniest thing.
Yeah, so they're harder to develop (unless you're one of the 99.9\% of web programmers who use a library to handle the differences) but I can live with that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296964</id>
	<title>Re:BLOAT</title>
	<author>Bacon Bits</author>
	<datestamp>1259595000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What exactly is different or more efficient about making the browser parse new HTML tags and incorporate new libraries instead of making the browser run JavaScript every time the page is loaded and relying on third parties to produce browser plug-ins for standard web content?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What exactly is different or more efficient about making the browser parse new HTML tags and incorporate new libraries instead of making the browser run JavaScript every time the page is loaded and relying on third parties to produce browser plug-ins for standard web content ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What exactly is different or more efficient about making the browser parse new HTML tags and incorporate new libraries instead of making the browser run JavaScript every time the page is loaded and relying on third parties to produce browser plug-ins for standard web content?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30302260</id>
	<title>Re:What about offline gmail?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259574840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well as far as i know (from reading over some of the HTML5 functionality), HTML5 should be capable of running Gmail Offline.</p><p>There was a section i can remember reading that highlighted how you can create a file that will tell the browser to download a list of files, 3 different types of files were talked about as well.</p><p>Ah, found some stuff on it<br><a href="http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/offline.html#offline" title="whatwg.org" rel="nofollow">Offline Applications</a> [whatwg.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well as far as i know ( from reading over some of the HTML5 functionality ) , HTML5 should be capable of running Gmail Offline.There was a section i can remember reading that highlighted how you can create a file that will tell the browser to download a list of files , 3 different types of files were talked about as well.Ah , found some stuff on itOffline Applications [ whatwg.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well as far as i know (from reading over some of the HTML5 functionality), HTML5 should be capable of running Gmail Offline.There was a section i can remember reading that highlighted how you can create a file that will tell the browser to download a list of files, 3 different types of files were talked about as well.Ah, found some stuff on itOffline Applications [whatwg.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30305864</id>
	<title>Re:HTML 5</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1259588100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>HTML5 is pretty slick, but you have to remember most sites will never upgrade to it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Most sites will eventually disappear.</p><p>Most sites that you will be using 10 years from now probably don't exist.</p><p>So, while most existing sites won't upgrade to it, at some point in the future most sites will probably be using either HTML5 or something later.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>HTML5 is pretty slick , but you have to remember most sites will never upgrade to it.Most sites will eventually disappear.Most sites that you will be using 10 years from now probably do n't exist.So , while most existing sites wo n't upgrade to it , at some point in the future most sites will probably be using either HTML5 or something later .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HTML5 is pretty slick, but you have to remember most sites will never upgrade to it.Most sites will eventually disappear.Most sites that you will be using 10 years from now probably don't exist.So, while most existing sites won't upgrade to it, at some point in the future most sites will probably be using either HTML5 or something later.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297122</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296954</id>
	<title>I thought...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1259594940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>that Google Gears would be replaced by Google Sky Net ?</htmltext>
<tokenext>that Google Gears would be replaced by Google Sky Net ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that Google Gears would be replaced by Google Sky Net ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298258
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296854
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297496
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30299956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30300722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298268
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30303708
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297524
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30305864
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30299878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297072
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297688
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30302144
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297832
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297228
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30307104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30301056
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298434
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30423348
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297122
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30302260
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296778
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297338
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30299296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296820
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296858
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296702
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_12_02_139243_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296872
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296702
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30303708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296858
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297832
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30299956
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30302144
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298656
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296992
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297072
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30299878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30302260
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30301056
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30299296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297524
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298434
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298258
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30307104
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296964
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297512
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296854
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297338
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297128
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296680
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297034
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30298268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30300722
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296710
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30299334
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_12_02_139243.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296736
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296872
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297122
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297496
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30305864
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297228
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30423348
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30296778
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_12_02_139243.30297688
</commentlist>
</conversation>
