<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_06_1829223</id>
	<title>Microsoft Wants To Participate In SVG Development</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1262806620000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>rossendryv writes <i>"After many years of fighting against the standard, Microsoft announced they are joining the WC3's <a href="http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/">SVG working group</a> to <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685\_3-10426321-264.html">help with the development of SVG</a>. 'We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next-generation Web platform,' said Patrick Dengler, senior program manager on Microsoft's Internet Explorer team in a <a href="http://blogs.msdn.com/ie/archive/2010/01/05/microsoft-joins-w3c-svg-working-group.aspx">blog post</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>rossendryv writes " After many years of fighting against the standard , Microsoft announced they are joining the WC3 's SVG working group to help with the development of SVG .
'We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next-generation Web platform, ' said Patrick Dengler , senior program manager on Microsoft 's Internet Explorer team in a blog post .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>rossendryv writes "After many years of fighting against the standard, Microsoft announced they are joining the WC3's SVG working group to help with the development of SVG.
'We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next-generation Web platform,' said Patrick Dengler, senior program manager on Microsoft's Internet Explorer team in a blog post.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675804</id>
	<title>Oh, I can see where this is going --</title>
	<author>dwiget001</author>
	<datestamp>1262776440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>--</p><p>MSFT: Why, yes, we are here to help!</p><p>SVG WG: Uh, O.K., how exactly are you going to do that?</p><p>MSFT: Ever heard of a company called "Netscape"? Well, by cutting off their air supply, we made them a household name!</p><p>SVG WG: Oh, great....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>--MSFT : Why , yes , we are here to help ! SVG WG : Uh , O.K. , how exactly are you going to do that ? MSFT : Ever heard of a company called " Netscape " ?
Well , by cutting off their air supply , we made them a household name ! SVG WG : Oh , great... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>--MSFT: Why, yes, we are here to help!SVG WG: Uh, O.K., how exactly are you going to do that?MSFT: Ever heard of a company called "Netscape"?
Well, by cutting off their air supply, we made them a household name!SVG WG: Oh, great....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674304</id>
	<title>Re:SVG development?</title>
	<author>edittard</author>
	<datestamp>1262769540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>vi</htmltext>
<tokenext>vi</tokentext>
<sentencetext>vi</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674000</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30678758</id>
	<title>Re:Executable code, here we come</title>
	<author>tuomoks</author>
	<datestamp>1262796420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>But, but,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.. without that capability the poor developers don't know what to do? At least that's what I have heard last 20 years - every time (!) when bringing this up with any company they really, really need the capability to execute any (!) code / command coming in - can't be dangerous or any security problem, our provider / manufacturer said so and their salesman is a certified specialist - actually has 3 certificates from company XXXX and another 3 certificates from company YYYY !! Would be hilarious if it wouldn't be so sad - the IT / computer world is turning to commodity without any skills needed any more!</p><p>Back to the subject - it would / could be great and benefit everyone IF Microsoft could be trusted but as many have already said - if they don't even hint / promise to support a standard in their own product - how can anyone trust them? Sounds weird - or maybe not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>But , but , .. without that capability the poor developers do n't know what to do ?
At least that 's what I have heard last 20 years - every time ( !
) when bringing this up with any company they really , really need the capability to execute any ( !
) code / command coming in - ca n't be dangerous or any security problem , our provider / manufacturer said so and their salesman is a certified specialist - actually has 3 certificates from company XXXX and another 3 certificates from company YYYY ! !
Would be hilarious if it would n't be so sad - the IT / computer world is turning to commodity without any skills needed any more ! Back to the subject - it would / could be great and benefit everyone IF Microsoft could be trusted but as many have already said - if they do n't even hint / promise to support a standard in their own product - how can anyone trust them ?
Sounds weird - or maybe not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>But, but, .. without that capability the poor developers don't know what to do?
At least that's what I have heard last 20 years - every time (!
) when bringing this up with any company they really, really need the capability to execute any (!
) code / command coming in - can't be dangerous or any security problem, our provider / manufacturer said so and their salesman is a certified specialist - actually has 3 certificates from company XXXX and another 3 certificates from company YYYY !!
Would be hilarious if it wouldn't be so sad - the IT / computer world is turning to commodity without any skills needed any more!Back to the subject - it would / could be great and benefit everyone IF Microsoft could be trusted but as many have already said - if they don't even hint / promise to support a standard in their own product - how can anyone trust them?
Sounds weird - or maybe not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677478</id>
	<title>Re:SVG development?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262786220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yep - Inkscape.  Really nice.<br>But also dia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yep - Inkscape .
Really nice.But also dia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yep - Inkscape.
Really nice.But also dia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674494</id>
	<title>Re:Shenanigans</title>
	<author>msclrhd</author>
	<datestamp>1262770380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a part of Microsoft's continued commitment to<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/subvert, buyout, blackmail, corrupt, destroy and bend to our will/ interoperability and standards support...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a part of Microsoft 's continued commitment to /subvert , buyout , blackmail , corrupt , destroy and bend to our will/ interoperability and standards support.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a part of Microsoft's continued commitment to /subvert, buyout, blackmail, corrupt, destroy and bend to our will/ interoperability and standards support...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673984</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262811540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You do know that Adobe has stopped supporting their SVG plug-in, right? It was all fine and dandy until they bought Macromedia and didn't need a Flash competitor anymore.</p><p>dom</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You do know that Adobe has stopped supporting their SVG plug-in , right ?
It was all fine and dandy until they bought Macromedia and did n't need a Flash competitor anymore.dom</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You do know that Adobe has stopped supporting their SVG plug-in, right?
It was all fine and dandy until they bought Macromedia and didn't need a Flash competitor anymore.dom</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674750</id>
	<title>Re:Fixed</title>
	<author>tmp31416</author>
	<datestamp>1262771760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ahem.</p><p>quote:<br>"Wait a damn minute -- I invented Windows" - Xerox PARC</p><p>you should rather say:<br>"Wait a damn minute -- I invented Windows" - Douglas Engelbart</p><p>(Xerox did not invent as much as people like to say.  They just continued Engelbart's unsung work.  Period.)</p><p>tmp31416</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>ahem.quote : " Wait a damn minute -- I invented Windows " - Xerox PARCyou should rather say : " Wait a damn minute -- I invented Windows " - Douglas Engelbart ( Xerox did not invent as much as people like to say .
They just continued Engelbart 's unsung work .
Period. ) tmp31416</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ahem.quote:"Wait a damn minute -- I invented Windows" - Xerox PARCyou should rather say:"Wait a damn minute -- I invented Windows" - Douglas Engelbart(Xerox did not invent as much as people like to say.
They just continued Engelbart's unsung work.
Period.)tmp31416
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676032</id>
	<title>Re:LOL.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262777520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, thought the same; but, the ISO downfall, that slip might actually prove accurate... and we're the ones who are going to be pissed...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , thought the same ; but , the ISO downfall , that slip might actually prove accurate... and we 're the ones who are going to be pissed.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, thought the same; but, the ISO downfall, that slip might actually prove accurate... and we're the ones who are going to be pissed...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675090</id>
	<title>Re:SVG development?</title>
	<author>damianpeterson</author>
	<datestamp>1262773320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Inkscape all the way. I've been using it for a good couple of years now for logo design as well as web page layout which I export to PNG and slice up in GIMP.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Inkscape all the way .
I 've been using it for a good couple of years now for logo design as well as web page layout which I export to PNG and slice up in GIMP .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Inkscape all the way.
I've been using it for a good couple of years now for logo design as well as web page layout which I export to PNG and slice up in GIMP.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675094</id>
	<title>Re:Torpedo?</title>
	<author>DaFallus</author>
	<datestamp>1262773380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Kind of sounds like a trap...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Kind of sounds like a trap.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kind of sounds like a trap...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675476</id>
	<title>Re:Shenanigans</title>
	<author>Akita24</author>
	<datestamp>1262775120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Silly<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.er, do you really think they're talking about anything outside of their own products and standards?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Silly /.er , do you really think they 're talking about anything outside of their own products and standards ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Silly /.er, do you really think they're talking about anything outside of their own products and standards?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674576</id>
	<title>WC3?</title>
	<author>ZsoL</author>
	<datestamp>1262770740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think that WC3 should be more like W3C, or am I missing something?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think that WC3 should be more like W3C , or am I missing something ?
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think that WC3 should be more like W3C, or am I missing something?
;)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674062</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>msclrhd</author>
	<datestamp>1262768700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MFC is a C++ UI framework, with classes for different UI widgets and Operating System components (such as threads). WinForms is MFC for C#.</p><p>XAML is an XML serialisation format for a set of namespaces that define UI widgets (think Mozilla XUL, Qt UI XML or Gtk's Glade), vector graphics (shapes, gradient fills, etc -- think SVG) and other bits and pieces (it even supports styling (think CSS in XML) and data templates (think XSL:T bound to C# data classes instead of XML elements)).</p><p>That is, you can do things like:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; <br>instead of:<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Rectangle r = new Rectangle();<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; r.Fill = "Red";</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MFC is a C + + UI framework , with classes for different UI widgets and Operating System components ( such as threads ) .
WinForms is MFC for C # .XAML is an XML serialisation format for a set of namespaces that define UI widgets ( think Mozilla XUL , Qt UI XML or Gtk 's Glade ) , vector graphics ( shapes , gradient fills , etc -- think SVG ) and other bits and pieces ( it even supports styling ( think CSS in XML ) and data templates ( think XSL : T bound to C # data classes instead of XML elements ) ) .That is , you can do things like :       instead of :       Rectangle r = new Rectangle ( ) ;       r.Fill = " Red " ;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MFC is a C++ UI framework, with classes for different UI widgets and Operating System components (such as threads).
WinForms is MFC for C#.XAML is an XML serialisation format for a set of namespaces that define UI widgets (think Mozilla XUL, Qt UI XML or Gtk's Glade), vector graphics (shapes, gradient fills, etc -- think SVG) and other bits and pieces (it even supports styling (think CSS in XML) and data templates (think XSL:T bound to C# data classes instead of XML elements)).That is, you can do things like:
      instead of:
      Rectangle r = new Rectangle();
      r.Fill = "Red";</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677594</id>
	<title>Re:Executable code, here we come</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1262786880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its already there, its called foreign objects, and MS had nothing to do with its introduction.   Of course depending on your definition you might want to count the fact that it supports scripting and that the scripting interface is extensible allowing for fully standard compliant SVG files using script parsers that don't exist yet.</p><p>If you had a clue, you might realize that pretty much every document format in use has a way to do so on every OS.</p><p>The need to embed executable code in order to render other objects is something most standards designers actually plan on when developing these standards.  Its called forwards compatibility and extensibility.</p><p>I'm sorry that you feel in order for documents to be useful they have to be a pain in the ass to view and require you to meet some unknown list of installed dependancies before you view it.  I really do hope that at some point you realize that embedding 'platform specific services' and 'executable code' directly in documents is not a MS invention and is done by everyone, including your web browser (with the exception of Lynx perhaps).</p><p>It amazes me how ignorant people can be and still get modded insightful.  You use applications and document formats that do this all day long, yet you only shout when MS does it.</p><p>Seriously, stop being such a douche fanboy and get a clue before you start talking again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its already there , its called foreign objects , and MS had nothing to do with its introduction .
Of course depending on your definition you might want to count the fact that it supports scripting and that the scripting interface is extensible allowing for fully standard compliant SVG files using script parsers that do n't exist yet.If you had a clue , you might realize that pretty much every document format in use has a way to do so on every OS.The need to embed executable code in order to render other objects is something most standards designers actually plan on when developing these standards .
Its called forwards compatibility and extensibility.I 'm sorry that you feel in order for documents to be useful they have to be a pain in the ass to view and require you to meet some unknown list of installed dependancies before you view it .
I really do hope that at some point you realize that embedding 'platform specific services ' and 'executable code ' directly in documents is not a MS invention and is done by everyone , including your web browser ( with the exception of Lynx perhaps ) .It amazes me how ignorant people can be and still get modded insightful .
You use applications and document formats that do this all day long , yet you only shout when MS does it.Seriously , stop being such a douche fanboy and get a clue before you start talking again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its already there, its called foreign objects, and MS had nothing to do with its introduction.
Of course depending on your definition you might want to count the fact that it supports scripting and that the scripting interface is extensible allowing for fully standard compliant SVG files using script parsers that don't exist yet.If you had a clue, you might realize that pretty much every document format in use has a way to do so on every OS.The need to embed executable code in order to render other objects is something most standards designers actually plan on when developing these standards.
Its called forwards compatibility and extensibility.I'm sorry that you feel in order for documents to be useful they have to be a pain in the ass to view and require you to meet some unknown list of installed dependancies before you view it.
I really do hope that at some point you realize that embedding 'platform specific services' and 'executable code' directly in documents is not a MS invention and is done by everyone, including your web browser (with the exception of Lynx perhaps).It amazes me how ignorant people can be and still get modded insightful.
You use applications and document formats that do this all day long, yet you only shout when MS does it.Seriously, stop being such a douche fanboy and get a clue before you start talking again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30678902</id>
	<title>Re:LOL.</title>
	<author>Will.Woodhull</author>
	<datestamp>1262797680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Coming soon to a computer near you: "MSSVG; it's the ENHANCED SVG!"

<p>Fixt dat for ya.

</p><p> <tt>What irritates me most at the moment are slashdot sigs that call for the death of perfectly good memes. The sophomoric quality of slashdot is a part of its charm.</tt></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Coming soon to a computer near you : " MSSVG ; it 's the ENHANCED SVG !
" Fixt dat for ya .
What irritates me most at the moment are slashdot sigs that call for the death of perfectly good memes .
The sophomoric quality of slashdot is a part of its charm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coming soon to a computer near you: "MSSVG; it's the ENHANCED SVG!
"

Fixt dat for ya.
What irritates me most at the moment are slashdot sigs that call for the death of perfectly good memes.
The sophomoric quality of slashdot is a part of its charm.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676306</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673754</id>
	<title>Fixed</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262810520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next generation Web platform. As evidenced by our ongoing involvement in W3C working groups, we are committed to participating in the standards process <i>to subvert those standards to our benefit</i>. Our involvement with the SVG working group builds on that commitment.</p></div><p>Fixed that for you.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next generation Web platform .
As evidenced by our ongoing involvement in W3C working groups , we are committed to participating in the standards process to subvert those standards to our benefit .
Our involvement with the SVG working group builds on that commitment.Fixed that for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next generation Web platform.
As evidenced by our ongoing involvement in W3C working groups, we are committed to participating in the standards process to subvert those standards to our benefit.
Our involvement with the SVG working group builds on that commitment.Fixed that for you.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676306</id>
	<title>Re:LOL.</title>
	<author>mwvdlee</author>
	<datestamp>1262778900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Coming soon to a computer near you: "MSSVG; it's almost SVG!"<br>Oh, I can't wait to find out what all the neato, Windows-specific incompatibilities are going to be!<br>I was kinda happy with MS not joining in any standards, atleast that way the standards remain standard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Coming soon to a computer near you : " MSSVG ; it 's almost SVG !
" Oh , I ca n't wait to find out what all the neato , Windows-specific incompatibilities are going to be ! I was kinda happy with MS not joining in any standards , atleast that way the standards remain standard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Coming soon to a computer near you: "MSSVG; it's almost SVG!
"Oh, I can't wait to find out what all the neato, Windows-specific incompatibilities are going to be!I was kinda happy with MS not joining in any standards, atleast that way the standards remain standard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673708</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677514</id>
	<title>Re:SVG development?</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1262786340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Depends.</p><p>Preface: I create non-trivial SVGs that pull in customer data to create a static image for web pages.  An example would be something like a tshirt printing website that uses SVGs as templates and allows the user to enter text to be displayed on the shirt and presenting it to the user for verification of the design before printing it.  Its far more complex than that as we have custom images, company wide data, all sorts of stuff, the templates can be rather complex and result in SVGs which are several megs in size.</p><p>All of these pros and cons are from my perspective and requirements, they wouldn't apply to some guy who just wants to make drawings for him/herself for instance.  One of my requirements is that the SVG is 100\% compliant with the SVG standard, or with the 1.2 working draft.</p><p>Basic SVGs?  I prefer Sketsa (Commercial and overpriced), but we use Batik as our backend processor, so the fact that they share the same rendering engine means I get WYSIWYG for the most part.  It is however seriously lacking in features that we require.</p><p>As an editor, it doesn't support: text flows, setting attributes of the SVG elements that it is unaware of (can be fixed with a plugin, but I've not finished that code yet!), it has some seriously retarded bugs when setting attributes on elements that it does know about.  Interactivity and animation, is a wash, I think the recent versions allow some basic things with an experimental plugin but I've haven't tried them.  They were trying to make a flash-like editor interface at one point.  It does produce SVGs that are standard compliant.  I've yet to come across one that didn't validate and render properly in any known good rendering engine (Batik, Adobe SVG plugin, Renesis SVG plugin).</p><p>Inkscape, the latest release is actually getting to where its useful for my needs.  Recent versions include text flow support which just makes me as happy as can be.  It does some utterly retarded things as well.  It uses its own custom extensions for filters even when saving in the 'standard' svg format rather than its own, even when the standard filters work the exact same way.  Its rendering backend isn't very standards compliant.  It won't pass even a small percentage of the tests for the most basic SVG profile test suite.  It will now generate SVG fonts, but can't render SVG fonts used in documents.  The font generation does not pass the SVG test suite however.</p><p>I can now use Inkscape to edit some SVGs without resorting to a text editor, but the fact that it saves with its own extensions even when I tell it to use the standard format means that in a lot of cases, its just used to generate a reference block of code that I use with a text editor.</p><p>Adobe Illustrator, for someone who knows nothing about SVGs and doesn't need to do anything really special, Illustrator works great.  With the right export settings it will output very compliant SVG files.  The code it produces isn't always the prettiest, but it does seem to work and it seems that Batik will pretty much always render it identical to Illustrator, which is a good sign.  Good, but not perfect font support, it uses its own names so even if using system fonts, if you don't embed them in the document they fall back to the default when rendered in other renderers because the names don't match.  Easy fix by embedded the fonts but this isn't always legally allowed and bloats the hell out of the file size in our case as we have to include all the glyphs in the font in the SVG file as the actual text in the SVG file may change at rendering time (these SVGs are really templates that pull in external data).  We use this to allow low end graphics people who can stumble around illustrator to produce SVGs which we can then finalize by hand to be useful for our templates.  It doesn't allow you to edit any of the attributes of SVG elements directly.  It does allow for Interactivity and does do a good job of using proper SVG filters.</p><p>The one I always end up in however is a text editor.  I generally use one o</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Depends.Preface : I create non-trivial SVGs that pull in customer data to create a static image for web pages .
An example would be something like a tshirt printing website that uses SVGs as templates and allows the user to enter text to be displayed on the shirt and presenting it to the user for verification of the design before printing it .
Its far more complex than that as we have custom images , company wide data , all sorts of stuff , the templates can be rather complex and result in SVGs which are several megs in size.All of these pros and cons are from my perspective and requirements , they would n't apply to some guy who just wants to make drawings for him/herself for instance .
One of my requirements is that the SVG is 100 \ % compliant with the SVG standard , or with the 1.2 working draft.Basic SVGs ?
I prefer Sketsa ( Commercial and overpriced ) , but we use Batik as our backend processor , so the fact that they share the same rendering engine means I get WYSIWYG for the most part .
It is however seriously lacking in features that we require.As an editor , it does n't support : text flows , setting attributes of the SVG elements that it is unaware of ( can be fixed with a plugin , but I 've not finished that code yet !
) , it has some seriously retarded bugs when setting attributes on elements that it does know about .
Interactivity and animation , is a wash , I think the recent versions allow some basic things with an experimental plugin but I 've have n't tried them .
They were trying to make a flash-like editor interface at one point .
It does produce SVGs that are standard compliant .
I 've yet to come across one that did n't validate and render properly in any known good rendering engine ( Batik , Adobe SVG plugin , Renesis SVG plugin ) .Inkscape , the latest release is actually getting to where its useful for my needs .
Recent versions include text flow support which just makes me as happy as can be .
It does some utterly retarded things as well .
It uses its own custom extensions for filters even when saving in the 'standard ' svg format rather than its own , even when the standard filters work the exact same way .
Its rendering backend is n't very standards compliant .
It wo n't pass even a small percentage of the tests for the most basic SVG profile test suite .
It will now generate SVG fonts , but ca n't render SVG fonts used in documents .
The font generation does not pass the SVG test suite however.I can now use Inkscape to edit some SVGs without resorting to a text editor , but the fact that it saves with its own extensions even when I tell it to use the standard format means that in a lot of cases , its just used to generate a reference block of code that I use with a text editor.Adobe Illustrator , for someone who knows nothing about SVGs and does n't need to do anything really special , Illustrator works great .
With the right export settings it will output very compliant SVG files .
The code it produces is n't always the prettiest , but it does seem to work and it seems that Batik will pretty much always render it identical to Illustrator , which is a good sign .
Good , but not perfect font support , it uses its own names so even if using system fonts , if you do n't embed them in the document they fall back to the default when rendered in other renderers because the names do n't match .
Easy fix by embedded the fonts but this is n't always legally allowed and bloats the hell out of the file size in our case as we have to include all the glyphs in the font in the SVG file as the actual text in the SVG file may change at rendering time ( these SVGs are really templates that pull in external data ) .
We use this to allow low end graphics people who can stumble around illustrator to produce SVGs which we can then finalize by hand to be useful for our templates .
It does n't allow you to edit any of the attributes of SVG elements directly .
It does allow for Interactivity and does do a good job of using proper SVG filters.The one I always end up in however is a text editor .
I generally use one o</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Depends.Preface: I create non-trivial SVGs that pull in customer data to create a static image for web pages.
An example would be something like a tshirt printing website that uses SVGs as templates and allows the user to enter text to be displayed on the shirt and presenting it to the user for verification of the design before printing it.
Its far more complex than that as we have custom images, company wide data, all sorts of stuff, the templates can be rather complex and result in SVGs which are several megs in size.All of these pros and cons are from my perspective and requirements, they wouldn't apply to some guy who just wants to make drawings for him/herself for instance.
One of my requirements is that the SVG is 100\% compliant with the SVG standard, or with the 1.2 working draft.Basic SVGs?
I prefer Sketsa (Commercial and overpriced), but we use Batik as our backend processor, so the fact that they share the same rendering engine means I get WYSIWYG for the most part.
It is however seriously lacking in features that we require.As an editor, it doesn't support: text flows, setting attributes of the SVG elements that it is unaware of (can be fixed with a plugin, but I've not finished that code yet!
), it has some seriously retarded bugs when setting attributes on elements that it does know about.
Interactivity and animation, is a wash, I think the recent versions allow some basic things with an experimental plugin but I've haven't tried them.
They were trying to make a flash-like editor interface at one point.
It does produce SVGs that are standard compliant.
I've yet to come across one that didn't validate and render properly in any known good rendering engine (Batik, Adobe SVG plugin, Renesis SVG plugin).Inkscape, the latest release is actually getting to where its useful for my needs.
Recent versions include text flow support which just makes me as happy as can be.
It does some utterly retarded things as well.
It uses its own custom extensions for filters even when saving in the 'standard' svg format rather than its own, even when the standard filters work the exact same way.
Its rendering backend isn't very standards compliant.
It won't pass even a small percentage of the tests for the most basic SVG profile test suite.
It will now generate SVG fonts, but can't render SVG fonts used in documents.
The font generation does not pass the SVG test suite however.I can now use Inkscape to edit some SVGs without resorting to a text editor, but the fact that it saves with its own extensions even when I tell it to use the standard format means that in a lot of cases, its just used to generate a reference block of code that I use with a text editor.Adobe Illustrator, for someone who knows nothing about SVGs and doesn't need to do anything really special, Illustrator works great.
With the right export settings it will output very compliant SVG files.
The code it produces isn't always the prettiest, but it does seem to work and it seems that Batik will pretty much always render it identical to Illustrator, which is a good sign.
Good, but not perfect font support, it uses its own names so even if using system fonts, if you don't embed them in the document they fall back to the default when rendered in other renderers because the names don't match.
Easy fix by embedded the fonts but this isn't always legally allowed and bloats the hell out of the file size in our case as we have to include all the glyphs in the font in the SVG file as the actual text in the SVG file may change at rendering time (these SVGs are really templates that pull in external data).
We use this to allow low end graphics people who can stumble around illustrator to produce SVGs which we can then finalize by hand to be useful for our templates.
It doesn't allow you to edit any of the attributes of SVG elements directly.
It does allow for Interactivity and does do a good job of using proper SVG filters.The one I always end up in however is a text editor.
I generally use one o</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673730</id>
	<title>Torpedo?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262810400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't really know how the W3C is organized, but shouldn't there be some protection against allowing organizations who are openly hostile toward a technology from sitting on the committee?  Isn't this just common sense?</p><p>Who do they think they are?  The UN?</p><p>-Peter</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't really know how the W3C is organized , but should n't there be some protection against allowing organizations who are openly hostile toward a technology from sitting on the committee ?
Is n't this just common sense ? Who do they think they are ?
The UN ? -Peter</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't really know how the W3C is organized, but shouldn't there be some protection against allowing organizations who are openly hostile toward a technology from sitting on the committee?
Isn't this just common sense?Who do they think they are?
The UN?-Peter</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673870</id>
	<title>Good morning Microsoft!</title>
	<author>McNihil</author>
	<datestamp>1262811120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Nice of you to finally join the rest of the class, did you drink too much last decade?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice of you to finally join the rest of the class , did you drink too much last decade ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice of you to finally join the rest of the class, did you drink too much last decade?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674760</id>
	<title>They will piss in your Wheaties.</title>
	<author>Stumbles</author>
	<datestamp>1262771820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Get ready for Microsoft to sabotage them much like they did with the XML standards.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Get ready for Microsoft to sabotage them much like they did with the XML standards .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Get ready for Microsoft to sabotage them much like they did with the XML standards.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675428</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262775000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look, you can knock IE for not supporting SVG, but the fact that Firefox and WebKit know about SVG and will in some cases display them is not the same as them SUPPORTING SVG.</p><p>Firefox and WebKit both suck ass at SVG support, if you don't think so than you really haven't done anything with SVG outside of some examples you found on the web.</p><p>No browser supports any SVG 'standard', IE is far from alone.</p><p>When I need to use SVGs on a web page, I end up embedding a Java applet using Apache Batik so I at LEAST have support for the useful portions of the standard beyond basic filled text and primitive shapes.</p><p>As SVG support in browsers stands now, you render to an image and display it rather than attempting to let the browser handle it, that is, if you want the SVG to actually work as designed.</p><p>When someone creates a open (IE: BSD licensed so EVERYONE can actually use it) C SVG library, and the browsers actually pick up on it, THEN I'll start worrying about which browsers support SVG, until then SVG is more of a joke than XAML or VML, both of which have better support on OSes other than Windows than SVG has anywhere (with the exception of Java apps using Batik).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look , you can knock IE for not supporting SVG , but the fact that Firefox and WebKit know about SVG and will in some cases display them is not the same as them SUPPORTING SVG.Firefox and WebKit both suck ass at SVG support , if you do n't think so than you really have n't done anything with SVG outside of some examples you found on the web.No browser supports any SVG 'standard ' , IE is far from alone.When I need to use SVGs on a web page , I end up embedding a Java applet using Apache Batik so I at LEAST have support for the useful portions of the standard beyond basic filled text and primitive shapes.As SVG support in browsers stands now , you render to an image and display it rather than attempting to let the browser handle it , that is , if you want the SVG to actually work as designed.When someone creates a open ( IE : BSD licensed so EVERYONE can actually use it ) C SVG library , and the browsers actually pick up on it , THEN I 'll start worrying about which browsers support SVG , until then SVG is more of a joke than XAML or VML , both of which have better support on OSes other than Windows than SVG has anywhere ( with the exception of Java apps using Batik ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look, you can knock IE for not supporting SVG, but the fact that Firefox and WebKit know about SVG and will in some cases display them is not the same as them SUPPORTING SVG.Firefox and WebKit both suck ass at SVG support, if you don't think so than you really haven't done anything with SVG outside of some examples you found on the web.No browser supports any SVG 'standard', IE is far from alone.When I need to use SVGs on a web page, I end up embedding a Java applet using Apache Batik so I at LEAST have support for the useful portions of the standard beyond basic filled text and primitive shapes.As SVG support in browsers stands now, you render to an image and display it rather than attempting to let the browser handle it, that is, if you want the SVG to actually work as designed.When someone creates a open (IE: BSD licensed so EVERYONE can actually use it) C SVG library, and the browsers actually pick up on it, THEN I'll start worrying about which browsers support SVG, until then SVG is more of a joke than XAML or VML, both of which have better support on OSes other than Windows than SVG has anywhere (with the exception of Java apps using Batik).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676040</id>
	<title>Don't even have to extend to extinguish</title>
	<author>l0b0</author>
	<datestamp>1262777580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another simple tactic for them would be to simply bog down the SVG approval process to the point where the next version will be obsolete by the time it's approved. Queue tons of implementations conforming to a moving target and lots of extra work while the real MS heads get together to churn out another competitor as fast as they can.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another simple tactic for them would be to simply bog down the SVG approval process to the point where the next version will be obsolete by the time it 's approved .
Queue tons of implementations conforming to a moving target and lots of extra work while the real MS heads get together to churn out another competitor as fast as they can .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another simple tactic for them would be to simply bog down the SVG approval process to the point where the next version will be obsolete by the time it's approved.
Queue tons of implementations conforming to a moving target and lots of extra work while the real MS heads get together to churn out another competitor as fast as they can.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674874</id>
	<title>Want to help?</title>
	<author>Lord Lode</author>
	<datestamp>1262772420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MS, if you want to help SVG, how about supporting the current standard of it in your browser? kthx.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS , if you want to help SVG , how about supporting the current standard of it in your browser ?
kthx .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS, if you want to help SVG, how about supporting the current standard of it in your browser?
kthx.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673914</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>25thCenturyQuaker</author>
	<datestamp>1262811300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>"Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last moment and hope everyone forgets..."</p></div></blockquote><p>&lt;Elaine Benes-ish&gt;<i>"<b>That's</b> what they are! They're real sidlers!!!"</i>&lt;/Elaine Benes-ish&gt;</p><p>Someone needs to slip little boxes of Tic-Tacs in Microsoft's pockets.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last moment and hope everyone forgets... " " That 's what they are !
They 're real sidlers ! ! !
" Someone needs to slip little boxes of Tic-Tacs in Microsoft 's pockets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last moment and hope everyone forgets...""That's what they are!
They're real sidlers!!!
"Someone needs to slip little boxes of Tic-Tacs in Microsoft's pockets.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676412</id>
	<title>Re:Torpedo?</title>
	<author>blind biker</author>
	<datestamp>1262779680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I don't really know how the W3C is organized, but shouldn't there be some protection against allowing organizations who are openly hostile toward a technology from sitting on the committee? Isn't this just common sense?</p><p>Who do they think they are? The UN?</p></div><p>For those who don't get the UN reference: the OP is referring to the UN commission for human rights, regularly filled and chaired by countries that shit all over human rights.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't really know how the W3C is organized , but should n't there be some protection against allowing organizations who are openly hostile toward a technology from sitting on the committee ?
Is n't this just common sense ? Who do they think they are ?
The UN ? For those who do n't get the UN reference : the OP is referring to the UN commission for human rights , regularly filled and chaired by countries that shit all over human rights .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't really know how the W3C is organized, but shouldn't there be some protection against allowing organizations who are openly hostile toward a technology from sitting on the committee?
Isn't this just common sense?Who do they think they are?
The UN?For those who don't get the UN reference: the OP is referring to the UN commission for human rights, regularly filled and chaired by countries that shit all over human rights.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674716</id>
	<title>Let me fix that for you Ballmer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262771520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Microsoft wants to fuck up the W3C SVG effort."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Microsoft wants to fuck up the W3C SVG effort .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Microsoft wants to fuck up the W3C SVG effort.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675334</id>
	<title>Re:That's nice</title>
	<author>Angst Badger</author>
	<datestamp>1262774520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.</p></div><p>Pretty much. It'd be like me wanting to get in on the SVG committee, and I have one advantage that Microsoft doesn't: I've actually <i>used</i> SVG. Okay, two advantages: I don't have a vested interest in seeing the standardization process fail miserably.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Until they implement the current SVG standards , they should be kept away.Pretty much .
It 'd be like me wanting to get in on the SVG committee , and I have one advantage that Microsoft does n't : I 've actually used SVG .
Okay , two advantages : I do n't have a vested interest in seeing the standardization process fail miserably .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.Pretty much.
It'd be like me wanting to get in on the SVG committee, and I have one advantage that Microsoft doesn't: I've actually used SVG.
Okay, two advantages: I don't have a vested interest in seeing the standardization process fail miserably.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673726</id>
	<title>Oh thank you so very much.... NOT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262810340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm sure their help will be just like that they gave to the development of OpenGL.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm sure their help will be just like that they gave to the development of OpenGL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm sure their help will be just like that they gave to the development of OpenGL.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674084</id>
	<title>Its like bein' taken out fo' a beer by ...</title>
	<author>crovira</author>
	<datestamp>1262768760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Two Fingerz Ronnie" and he calls you into the back of the place, so he can slip you a shiv between da ribs an' he don' have to walk as far to dispose of da body in the alley 'round back.</p><p>I'd trust MS about as much as I'd trust "Two Fingerz."</p><p>They like to embrace, extend, fuck you up, go back on standards, steal your technology and leave you bleeding in a back alley. (Remember J-Script? Not JavaScript, J-Script. They couldn't call it JavaScript. But they tried.)</p><p>MS has NEVER played straight with ANYBODY.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Two Fingerz Ronnie " and he calls you into the back of the place , so he can slip you a shiv between da ribs an ' he don ' have to walk as far to dispose of da body in the alley 'round back.I 'd trust MS about as much as I 'd trust " Two Fingerz .
" They like to embrace , extend , fuck you up , go back on standards , steal your technology and leave you bleeding in a back alley .
( Remember J-Script ?
Not JavaScript , J-Script .
They could n't call it JavaScript .
But they tried .
) MS has NEVER played straight with ANYBODY .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Two Fingerz Ronnie" and he calls you into the back of the place, so he can slip you a shiv between da ribs an' he don' have to walk as far to dispose of da body in the alley 'round back.I'd trust MS about as much as I'd trust "Two Fingerz.
"They like to embrace, extend, fuck you up, go back on standards, steal your technology and leave you bleeding in a back alley.
(Remember J-Script?
Not JavaScript, J-Script.
They couldn't call it JavaScript.
But they tried.
)MS has NEVER played straight with ANYBODY.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30682736</id>
	<title>Re:Resist! its just OOXML all over again</title>
	<author>Ginger Unicorn</author>
	<datestamp>1262881560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>that particular stunt didn't break the entire ISO, just the particular committee involved. The rest of ISO is as it was before MS stuffed that committee with disinterested astroturf puppets that will never show up to vote again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>that particular stunt did n't break the entire ISO , just the particular committee involved .
The rest of ISO is as it was before MS stuffed that committee with disinterested astroturf puppets that will never show up to vote again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that particular stunt didn't break the entire ISO, just the particular committee involved.
The rest of ISO is as it was before MS stuffed that committee with disinterested astroturf puppets that will never show up to vote again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676282</id>
	<title>Microsoft's first submission to the new SVG std..</title>
	<author>theendlessnow</author>
	<datestamp>1262778780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Section 1.2.5.3.2.8.200.1</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Entity SILVERLIGHT\_30034509, type STREAM</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Contains an open, standard set of Silverlight objects for interpretation.</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; Entity SILVERLIGHT\_FIXERUPPER, type BOOLEAN</p><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; To work around bugs in Silverlight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Section 1.2.5.3.2.8.200.1     Entity SILVERLIGHT \ _30034509 , type STREAM     Contains an open , standard set of Silverlight objects for interpretation .
    Entity SILVERLIGHT \ _FIXERUPPER , type BOOLEAN     To work around bugs in Silverlight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Section 1.2.5.3.2.8.200.1
    Entity SILVERLIGHT\_30034509, type STREAM
    Contains an open, standard set of Silverlight objects for interpretation.
    Entity SILVERLIGHT\_FIXERUPPER, type BOOLEAN
    To work around bugs in Silverlight.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674102</id>
	<title>There's an old saying about Microsoft..</title>
	<author>mewsenews</author>
	<datestamp>1262768820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Embrace &lt;-- you are here<br>Extend<br>Extinguish</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Embrace ExtendExtinguish</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Embrace ExtendExtinguish</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674046</id>
	<title>Resist! its just OOXML all over again</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262768640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here we go again: http://noooxml.wikidot.com</p><p>"Committee stuffing is a standard practice for Microsoft. Microsoft raped ISO with their office file formats, leaving the organization in limbo. The whole campaign against the format have raised an army of people, which are furious about the dirty tactics used by Microsoft to get the broken standard through ISO. This anger won't go away, and I wish good luck to Microsoft to get it adopted by governments. The reputation of Microsoft went down below zero with this process."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here we go again : http : //noooxml.wikidot.com " Committee stuffing is a standard practice for Microsoft .
Microsoft raped ISO with their office file formats , leaving the organization in limbo .
The whole campaign against the format have raised an army of people , which are furious about the dirty tactics used by Microsoft to get the broken standard through ISO .
This anger wo n't go away , and I wish good luck to Microsoft to get it adopted by governments .
The reputation of Microsoft went down below zero with this process .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here we go again: http://noooxml.wikidot.com"Committee stuffing is a standard practice for Microsoft.
Microsoft raped ISO with their office file formats, leaving the organization in limbo.
The whole campaign against the format have raised an army of people, which are furious about the dirty tactics used by Microsoft to get the broken standard through ISO.
This anger won't go away, and I wish good luck to Microsoft to get it adopted by governments.
The reputation of Microsoft went down below zero with this process.
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674050</id>
	<title>Executable code, here we come</title>
	<author>Animats</author>
	<datestamp>1262768640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
You just know that Microsoft will try to stick in some way to embed executable code, so SVG files can invoke "platform specific services".
</p><p>
Besides, without that, it won't be useful for viruses and trojans.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You just know that Microsoft will try to stick in some way to embed executable code , so SVG files can invoke " platform specific services " .
Besides , without that , it wo n't be useful for viruses and trojans .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
You just know that Microsoft will try to stick in some way to embed executable code, so SVG files can invoke "platform specific services".
Besides, without that, it won't be useful for viruses and trojans.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673890</id>
	<title>What could possibly go wrong?</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1262811180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Okay, where is the "whatcouldpossiblygowrong" tag?  This article screams for it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Okay , where is the " whatcouldpossiblygowrong " tag ?
This article screams for it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Okay, where is the "whatcouldpossiblygowrong" tag?
This article screams for it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673936</id>
	<title>Shenanigans</title>
	<author>fuckface</author>
	<datestamp>1262811420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>First sentence of TFA:<br>
<i>As a part of Microsoft's continued commitment to interoperability and standards support...</i> <br> <br>

Uh, when did that happen? I have yet to see M$ ever work toward either of those goals.</htmltext>
<tokenext>First sentence of TFA : As a part of Microsoft 's continued commitment to interoperability and standards support.. . Uh , when did that happen ?
I have yet to see M $ ever work toward either of those goals .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First sentence of TFA:
As a part of Microsoft's continued commitment to interoperability and standards support...  

Uh, when did that happen?
I have yet to see M$ ever work toward either of those goals.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673822</id>
	<title>Embrace, Extend, Extinguish</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262810820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Title says it all. We've seen this before, folks.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Title says it all .
We 've seen this before , folks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Title says it all.
We've seen this before, folks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674418</id>
	<title>Re:Shenanigans</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262770020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They're completely committed to the standards process. Committed to fucking it up the ass, that is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're completely committed to the standards process .
Committed to fucking it up the ass , that is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're completely committed to the standards process.
Committed to fucking it up the ass, that is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673936</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674994</id>
	<title>Re:Executable code, here we come</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262772900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hate to break it to you - the full SVG spec already supports Javascript for things like animation and such.</p><p>All they need to do to discredit SVG files is implement them in their own little special way in IE9 with all sorts of helpful extensions - like the clever ability to write to disk (especially useful for displaying web pages)!  Seeking to help develop the SVG standard just makes it easier for people to blame the standard when things go wrong.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hate to break it to you - the full SVG spec already supports Javascript for things like animation and such.All they need to do to discredit SVG files is implement them in their own little special way in IE9 with all sorts of helpful extensions - like the clever ability to write to disk ( especially useful for displaying web pages ) !
Seeking to help develop the SVG standard just makes it easier for people to blame the standard when things go wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hate to break it to you - the full SVG spec already supports Javascript for things like animation and such.All they need to do to discredit SVG files is implement them in their own little special way in IE9 with all sorts of helpful extensions - like the clever ability to write to disk (especially useful for displaying web pages)!
Seeking to help develop the SVG standard just makes it easier for people to blame the standard when things go wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675684</id>
	<title>Call me a conformist...</title>
	<author>mrthoughtful</author>
	<datestamp>1262775900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Must that I am unfond of Microsoft business tactics, and hegemonising in manners that are contrary to the benefits of the community at large, I am tentatively very happy that Microsoft has joined the SVG WG.  On two counts - firstly, that they will add native support for it in their IE product (which, as far as I can see, is inevitable unless they truly are demonic); and secondly that it opens up a hope that they will move onto standards compliance, skip into the 21st century and support XHTML as an XML instance rather than as an HTML extension of an SGML instance.  Then at last, I won't have to have a fix for &lt;textarea<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/&gt; , &lt;div<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/&gt;, &lt;script<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/&gt; problems that arise after normalising XHTML documents.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Must that I am unfond of Microsoft business tactics , and hegemonising in manners that are contrary to the benefits of the community at large , I am tentatively very happy that Microsoft has joined the SVG WG .
On two counts - firstly , that they will add native support for it in their IE product ( which , as far as I can see , is inevitable unless they truly are demonic ) ; and secondly that it opens up a hope that they will move onto standards compliance , skip into the 21st century and support XHTML as an XML instance rather than as an HTML extension of an SGML instance .
Then at last , I wo n't have to have a fix for / &gt; , / &gt; , / &gt; problems that arise after normalising XHTML documents .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Must that I am unfond of Microsoft business tactics, and hegemonising in manners that are contrary to the benefits of the community at large, I am tentatively very happy that Microsoft has joined the SVG WG.
On two counts - firstly, that they will add native support for it in their IE product (which, as far as I can see, is inevitable unless they truly are demonic); and secondly that it opens up a hope that they will move onto standards compliance, skip into the 21st century and support XHTML as an XML instance rather than as an HTML extension of an SGML instance.
Then at last, I won't have to have a fix for  /&gt; ,  /&gt;,  /&gt; problems that arise after normalising XHTML documents.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148</id>
	<title>That's nice</title>
	<author>metamatic</author>
	<datestamp>1262769000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.</p><p>Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.</p><p>[Opinions mine, not IBM's.]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE , they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.Until they implement the current SVG standards , they should be kept away .
[ Opinions mine , not IBM 's .
]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.
[Opinions mine, not IBM's.
]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674000</id>
	<title>Re:SVG development?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262768460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Emacs</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Emacs</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Emacs</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674788</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>clampolo</author>
	<datestamp>1262772000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What does XAML have to do with SVG? Hell if you're going to bitch about XAML, maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too.</p></div><p> Not really.  WinForms and MFC are for desktop application deployment.  XAML and WPF allow deployment as executable apps but <b>also</b> can be embedded into web applications (i.e. Silverlight).</p><p>The complaint is that Microsoft has refused to support SVG in order to force people onto Silverlight.  So the complaints are completely relevant.  And with Microsoft supporting VML it would be trivial to support it in IE, so it seems that someone in upper management has told them NOT to support SVG.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What does XAML have to do with SVG ?
Hell if you 're going to bitch about XAML , maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too .
Not really .
WinForms and MFC are for desktop application deployment .
XAML and WPF allow deployment as executable apps but also can be embedded into web applications ( i.e .
Silverlight ) .The complaint is that Microsoft has refused to support SVG in order to force people onto Silverlight .
So the complaints are completely relevant .
And with Microsoft supporting VML it would be trivial to support it in IE , so it seems that someone in upper management has told them NOT to support SVG .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does XAML have to do with SVG?
Hell if you're going to bitch about XAML, maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too.
Not really.
WinForms and MFC are for desktop application deployment.
XAML and WPF allow deployment as executable apps but also can be embedded into web applications (i.e.
Silverlight).The complaint is that Microsoft has refused to support SVG in order to force people onto Silverlight.
So the complaints are completely relevant.
And with Microsoft supporting VML it would be trivial to support it in IE, so it seems that someone in upper management has told them NOT to support SVG.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674650</id>
	<title>are ms' intentions truly honest?</title>
	<author>tmp31416</author>
	<datestamp>1262771100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>oh, microsoft wants to join in svg development.</p><p>right.</p><p>just like intel that joined the ieee1394 (firewire) committee...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...just to undermine the standardization process of  firewire.</p><p>bill's people will use the same shenanigans that intel used (maybe we'll support it, maybe we won't... etc.) in order to get its own technology out and established before svg can get a real foothold in the market, if it ever becomes more than a marginal oddity like ogg.</p><p>or they will use the same "embrace, extend &amp; extinguish" tactics they used with java.</p><p>how can microsoft be kept in check (on a tight leash?) to ensure they don't corrupt the svg standard?</p><p>you can't change *decades* of nasty, predatorial behaviour overnight.  i strongly doubt ms' intentions are honest.</p><p>tmp31416</p><p>p.s.: taco, the new (current) slashot is awful.  could there be a way to view it in "usable" mode (i.e., pre-2004 or thereabout) without having to log in?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>oh , microsoft wants to join in svg development.right.just like intel that joined the ieee1394 ( firewire ) committee... ...just to undermine the standardization process of firewire.bill 's people will use the same shenanigans that intel used ( maybe we 'll support it , maybe we wo n't.. .
etc. ) in order to get its own technology out and established before svg can get a real foothold in the market , if it ever becomes more than a marginal oddity like ogg.or they will use the same " embrace , extend &amp; extinguish " tactics they used with java.how can microsoft be kept in check ( on a tight leash ?
) to ensure they do n't corrupt the svg standard ? you ca n't change * decades * of nasty , predatorial behaviour overnight .
i strongly doubt ms ' intentions are honest.tmp31416p.s .
: taco , the new ( current ) slashot is awful .
could there be a way to view it in " usable " mode ( i.e. , pre-2004 or thereabout ) without having to log in ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>oh, microsoft wants to join in svg development.right.just like intel that joined the ieee1394 (firewire) committee... ...just to undermine the standardization process of  firewire.bill's people will use the same shenanigans that intel used (maybe we'll support it, maybe we won't...
etc.) in order to get its own technology out and established before svg can get a real foothold in the market, if it ever becomes more than a marginal oddity like ogg.or they will use the same "embrace, extend &amp; extinguish" tactics they used with java.how can microsoft be kept in check (on a tight leash?
) to ensure they don't corrupt the svg standard?you can't change *decades* of nasty, predatorial behaviour overnight.
i strongly doubt ms' intentions are honest.tmp31416p.s.
: taco, the new (current) slashot is awful.
could there be a way to view it in "usable" mode (i.e., pre-2004 or thereabout) without having to log in?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674518</id>
	<title>Re:Embrace, Extend, Extinguish</title>
	<author>Demonantis</author>
	<datestamp>1262770500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They might not plan to extinguish per say. Thinking of printer drivers they will probably beat the standard with a bat enough that you will need a PhD to figure out whats going on. If they can't get proprietary at least they can make it so they are the only ones with enough cash to develop the standard. You know if your not the best make it harder for other people to be the best.</htmltext>
<tokenext>They might not plan to extinguish per say .
Thinking of printer drivers they will probably beat the standard with a bat enough that you will need a PhD to figure out whats going on .
If they ca n't get proprietary at least they can make it so they are the only ones with enough cash to develop the standard .
You know if your not the best make it harder for other people to be the best .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They might not plan to extinguish per say.
Thinking of printer drivers they will probably beat the standard with a bat enough that you will need a PhD to figure out whats going on.
If they can't get proprietary at least they can make it so they are the only ones with enough cash to develop the standard.
You know if your not the best make it harder for other people to be the best.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673822</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676236</id>
	<title>Re:That's nice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262778540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>if fully implementing the current SVG standard was a requirement then it would be a pretty damn empty meeting room for the standards commitee.</htmltext>
<tokenext>if fully implementing the current SVG standard was a requirement then it would be a pretty damn empty meeting room for the standards commitee .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if fully implementing the current SVG standard was a requirement then it would be a pretty damn empty meeting room for the standards commitee.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673878</id>
	<title>Re:Fixed</title>
	<author>SnarfQuest</author>
	<datestamp>1262811120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait for them to require Word and Excell as part of the standard, which they never plan on implementing anyway.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait for them to require Word and Excell as part of the standard , which they never plan on implementing anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait for them to require Word and Excell as part of the standard, which they never plan on implementing anyway.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673754</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675362</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1262774640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>XAML is more like XBL (mozilla), not really like SVG.  Its used for interface definitions, not graphics.  Contrary to popular belief, both flash and SVG can be used for user interfaces, and you're a fucking retard if you do it.</p><p>VML is more like SVG.  Its made for turning structured data into pretty pictures that use carbon based lifeforms find more useful.</p><p>Theres nothing wrong with competing standards initially, there is also nothing wrong with saying 'alright, we didn't when, we'll support your idea instead'.  Why do you have a problem with them giving up and doing what you wanted in the first place.</p><p>Your last paragraph is about right.  I'm not going to praise Microsoft for being special because they made this choice, its just the right thing to do.  I'm happy they aren't taking the typical MS approach <strong>YET</strong>.</p><p>Please kill flash.  Please.  I'm really tired of Adobe.  I used to love them, after my first couple of years of using photoshop 2, I probably would have ranked them as one of the greatest software companies in the world.  Unfortunately, they've got to the point where their apps are mature and theres nothing else to do, so now they are doing what MS and EA does and basically just changing things every so often to entice or induce you into upgrading, forcefully if possible.</p><p>If killing flash means I have to deal with MS for the time being, so be it.  I'd rather just have to deal with MS (XAML or VML) and SVG, than deal with MS, SVG, AND Adobe (flash).</p><p>The only thing really needed to kill flash is someone to make a C SVG renderer that doesn't suck.  Don't bother telling me about the C SVG renderers out there, I know about them and they all suck donkey balls.  All browser implementations are utter crap and no browser should claim SVG support.  Yes, you can draw a smiley face, but thats pretty much where it ends, nothing non-trivial renders properly in any browser, FORGET about interactivity, filters or animation or other SMIL linking (like sound).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>XAML is more like XBL ( mozilla ) , not really like SVG .
Its used for interface definitions , not graphics .
Contrary to popular belief , both flash and SVG can be used for user interfaces , and you 're a fucking retard if you do it.VML is more like SVG .
Its made for turning structured data into pretty pictures that use carbon based lifeforms find more useful.Theres nothing wrong with competing standards initially , there is also nothing wrong with saying 'alright , we did n't when , we 'll support your idea instead' .
Why do you have a problem with them giving up and doing what you wanted in the first place.Your last paragraph is about right .
I 'm not going to praise Microsoft for being special because they made this choice , its just the right thing to do .
I 'm happy they are n't taking the typical MS approach YET.Please kill flash .
Please. I 'm really tired of Adobe .
I used to love them , after my first couple of years of using photoshop 2 , I probably would have ranked them as one of the greatest software companies in the world .
Unfortunately , they 've got to the point where their apps are mature and theres nothing else to do , so now they are doing what MS and EA does and basically just changing things every so often to entice or induce you into upgrading , forcefully if possible.If killing flash means I have to deal with MS for the time being , so be it .
I 'd rather just have to deal with MS ( XAML or VML ) and SVG , than deal with MS , SVG , AND Adobe ( flash ) .The only thing really needed to kill flash is someone to make a C SVG renderer that does n't suck .
Do n't bother telling me about the C SVG renderers out there , I know about them and they all suck donkey balls .
All browser implementations are utter crap and no browser should claim SVG support .
Yes , you can draw a smiley face , but thats pretty much where it ends , nothing non-trivial renders properly in any browser , FORGET about interactivity , filters or animation or other SMIL linking ( like sound ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>XAML is more like XBL (mozilla), not really like SVG.
Its used for interface definitions, not graphics.
Contrary to popular belief, both flash and SVG can be used for user interfaces, and you're a fucking retard if you do it.VML is more like SVG.
Its made for turning structured data into pretty pictures that use carbon based lifeforms find more useful.Theres nothing wrong with competing standards initially, there is also nothing wrong with saying 'alright, we didn't when, we'll support your idea instead'.
Why do you have a problem with them giving up and doing what you wanted in the first place.Your last paragraph is about right.
I'm not going to praise Microsoft for being special because they made this choice, its just the right thing to do.
I'm happy they aren't taking the typical MS approach YET.Please kill flash.
Please.  I'm really tired of Adobe.
I used to love them, after my first couple of years of using photoshop 2, I probably would have ranked them as one of the greatest software companies in the world.
Unfortunately, they've got to the point where their apps are mature and theres nothing else to do, so now they are doing what MS and EA does and basically just changing things every so often to entice or induce you into upgrading, forcefully if possible.If killing flash means I have to deal with MS for the time being, so be it.
I'd rather just have to deal with MS (XAML or VML) and SVG, than deal with MS, SVG, AND Adobe (flash).The only thing really needed to kill flash is someone to make a C SVG renderer that doesn't suck.
Don't bother telling me about the C SVG renderers out there, I know about them and they all suck donkey balls.
All browser implementations are utter crap and no browser should claim SVG support.
Yes, you can draw a smiley face, but thats pretty much where it ends, nothing non-trivial renders properly in any browser, FORGET about interactivity, filters or animation or other SMIL linking (like sound).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674072</id>
	<title>Silverlight failed...</title>
	<author>SebaSOFT</author>
	<datestamp>1262768700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And NOW they embrace SVG. It's hilarious......</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And NOW they embrace SVG .
It 's hilarious..... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And NOW they embrace SVG.
It's hilarious......</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675158</id>
	<title>Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT</title>
	<author>eugene2k</author>
	<datestamp>1262773680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Judging by the members of the SVG working group (Apple, Opera, Mozilla) it's unlikely that they will be able to solely extend the standard.</p><p>P.S. Oh, and Microsoft is already mentioned <a href="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=19480&amp;public=1&amp;gs=1&amp;" title="w3.org" rel="nofollow">there</a> [w3.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Judging by the members of the SVG working group ( Apple , Opera , Mozilla ) it 's unlikely that they will be able to solely extend the standard.P.S .
Oh , and Microsoft is already mentioned there [ w3.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Judging by the members of the SVG working group (Apple, Opera, Mozilla) it's unlikely that they will be able to solely extend the standard.P.S.
Oh, and Microsoft is already mentioned there [w3.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677944</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262789400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So basically you tried to shove your own proprietary format (XAML?) down our throats...</p></div><p>How did Microsoft force XAML down our throats?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So basically you tried to shove your own proprietary format ( XAML ?
) down our throats...How did Microsoft force XAML down our throats ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So basically you tried to shove your own proprietary format (XAML?
) down our throats...How did Microsoft force XAML down our throats?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673830</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>Jason Earl</author>
	<datestamp>1262810880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Dengler didn't commit to add SVG to IE, and the company declined to comment about that possibility when asked.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Until Microsoft commits to supporting SVG in IE it is hard to see Microsoft's supposed <em>support</em> of the standard as anything but disingenuous.  As you point out, Microsoft's position at this point is ridiculous.  Not only has Microsoft been actively promoting an SVG competitor, but the primary reason why SVG isn't ubiquitous is the fact that SVG is not supported in Internet Explorer.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Dengler did n't commit to add SVG to IE , and the company declined to comment about that possibility when asked .
Until Microsoft commits to supporting SVG in IE it is hard to see Microsoft 's supposed support of the standard as anything but disingenuous .
As you point out , Microsoft 's position at this point is ridiculous .
Not only has Microsoft been actively promoting an SVG competitor , but the primary reason why SVG is n't ubiquitous is the fact that SVG is not supported in Internet Explorer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Dengler didn't commit to add SVG to IE, and the company declined to comment about that possibility when asked.
Until Microsoft commits to supporting SVG in IE it is hard to see Microsoft's supposed support of the standard as anything but disingenuous.
As you point out, Microsoft's position at this point is ridiculous.
Not only has Microsoft been actively promoting an SVG competitor, but the primary reason why SVG isn't ubiquitous is the fact that SVG is not supported in Internet Explorer.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673844</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262810940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What does XAML have to do with SVG?  Hell if you're going to bitch about XAML, maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too. They're equally unrelated.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What does XAML have to do with SVG ?
Hell if you 're going to bitch about XAML , maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too .
They 're equally unrelated .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does XAML have to do with SVG?
Hell if you're going to bitch about XAML, maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too.
They're equally unrelated.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675450</id>
	<title>Re:SVG development?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262775060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think either Vim or some XML editor. Though perhaps the latter may be too hand-holdy for some.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think either Vim or some XML editor .
Though perhaps the latter may be too hand-holdy for some .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think either Vim or some XML editor.
Though perhaps the latter may be too hand-holdy for some.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30683834</id>
	<title>Reminds me of...</title>
	<author>Yvanhoe</author>
	<datestamp>1262885640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>ISO OOXML debacle. Same scenario. Expect the bad guys to win.</htmltext>
<tokenext>ISO OOXML debacle .
Same scenario .
Expect the bad guys to win .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ISO OOXML debacle.
Same scenario.
Expect the bad guys to win.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674366</id>
	<title>and HTML5?</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1262769840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So where does this leave WebGL? Hopefully untarnished and free to become the de-facto web standard for vector graphics... oh, unless MS now decides that SVG support is sufficient and they don't need to support WebGL at all thus starting another "war" of which browser supports what features.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So where does this leave WebGL ?
Hopefully untarnished and free to become the de-facto web standard for vector graphics... oh , unless MS now decides that SVG support is sufficient and they do n't need to support WebGL at all thus starting another " war " of which browser supports what features .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So where does this leave WebGL?
Hopefully untarnished and free to become the de-facto web standard for vector graphics... oh, unless MS now decides that SVG support is sufficient and they don't need to support WebGL at all thus starting another "war" of which browser supports what features.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674242</id>
	<title>first, please</title>
	<author>BlueBoxSW.com</author>
	<datestamp>1262769300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Can have  Tag?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Can have Tag ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Can have  Tag?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676096</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1262777820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>XAML is an XML serialisation format for a set of namespaces that define UI widgets</p></div><p>That is incorrect. XAML is a general-purpose XML-based serialization format for CLR object trees (and, in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.NET 4, arbitrary object graphs). It doesn't have much to do specifically with UI. For example, the following is a perfectly valid piece of XAML markup, describing a collection with three elements:</p><blockquote><div><p> <tt>&lt;sc:ArrayList xmlns:s="clr-namespace:System;assembly=mscorlib"<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; xmlns:sc="clr-namespace:System.Collections;assembly=mscorlib"<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Capacity="100"&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;s:Object/&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;s:String&gt;Foo&lt;/s:String&gt;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;s:Int32&gt;123&lt;/s:Int32&gt;<br>&lt;/sc:ArrayList&gt;</tt></p></div> </blockquote><p>It just so happens that WPF (and Silverlight) provide a set of UI-related classes, instances of which are typically combined into trees, and hence are convenient to represent in XAML.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>XAML is an XML serialisation format for a set of namespaces that define UI widgetsThat is incorrect .
XAML is a general-purpose XML-based serialization format for CLR object trees ( and , in .NET 4 , arbitrary object graphs ) .
It does n't have much to do specifically with UI .
For example , the following is a perfectly valid piece of XAML markup , describing a collection with three elements :               xmlns : sc = " clr-namespace : System.Collections ; assembly = mscorlib "               Capacity = " 100 " &gt;         Foo     123 It just so happens that WPF ( and Silverlight ) provide a set of UI-related classes , instances of which are typically combined into trees , and hence are convenient to represent in XAML .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>XAML is an XML serialisation format for a set of namespaces that define UI widgetsThat is incorrect.
XAML is a general-purpose XML-based serialization format for CLR object trees (and, in .NET 4, arbitrary object graphs).
It doesn't have much to do specifically with UI.
For example, the following is a perfectly valid piece of XAML markup, describing a collection with three elements: 
              xmlns:sc="clr-namespace:System.Collections;assembly=mscorlib"
              Capacity="100"&gt;
    
    Foo
    123 It just so happens that WPF (and Silverlight) provide a set of UI-related classes, instances of which are typically combined into trees, and hence are convenient to represent in XAML.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674062</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674120</id>
	<title>it's a trap</title>
	<author>MoFoQ</author>
	<datestamp>1262768880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>it's a trap....didn't Microsoft do the same thing with other working groups (even other working groups of W3C)?<br>Not including the OpenDocument/XML "issue".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's a trap....did n't Microsoft do the same thing with other working groups ( even other working groups of W3C ) ? Not including the OpenDocument/XML " issue " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's a trap....didn't Microsoft do the same thing with other working groups (even other working groups of W3C)?Not including the OpenDocument/XML "issue".</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675252</id>
	<title>You forgot</title>
	<author>Trailer Trash</author>
	<datestamp>1262774100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>to put "help" in double-quotes.</p><p>Like when my kids decide to "help" make cookies.</p><p>Only, we still end up with something tasty when they help me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>to put " help " in double-quotes.Like when my kids decide to " help " make cookies.Only , we still end up with something tasty when they help me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>to put "help" in double-quotes.Like when my kids decide to "help" make cookies.Only, we still end up with something tasty when they help me.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673818</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>Meshach</author>
	<datestamp>1262810760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Agreed.  And it sounds like the SVG group is welcoming Microsoft to the table.  From the article:<blockquote><div><p>"On behalf of the SVG WG, let me welcome you to the group. We're excited by your joining, and look forward to your participation...and hopefully SVG support in IE9!"</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Microsoft is a big monolithic company; they don't move quickly.  If they put SVG in IE9 everyone will benifit.  I think this will lead to good things for SVG.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Agreed .
And it sounds like the SVG group is welcoming Microsoft to the table .
From the article : " On behalf of the SVG WG , let me welcome you to the group .
We 're excited by your joining , and look forward to your participation...and hopefully SVG support in IE9 !
" Microsoft is a big monolithic company ; they do n't move quickly .
If they put SVG in IE9 everyone will benifit .
I think this will lead to good things for SVG .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Agreed.
And it sounds like the SVG group is welcoming Microsoft to the table.
From the article:"On behalf of the SVG WG, let me welcome you to the group.
We're excited by your joining, and look forward to your participation...and hopefully SVG support in IE9!
"

Microsoft is a big monolithic company; they don't move quickly.
If they put SVG in IE9 everyone will benifit.
I think this will lead to good things for SVG.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676344</id>
	<title>SVG?</title>
	<author>trumpetboy8282</author>
	<datestamp>1262779140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just find it amusing that the image shown in TFA as "SVG" is actually a PNG...</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just find it amusing that the image shown in TFA as " SVG " is actually a PNG.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just find it amusing that the image shown in TFA as "SVG" is actually a PNG...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675220</id>
	<title>Re:That's nice</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262773980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.</p><p>Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.</p><p>[Opinions mine, not IBM's.]</p></div><p>Assuming that Microsoft would like to help refine the standard because the standard is broken (for their needs), does it really make sense that they need to implement a standard just so they can help redefine the standard and implement that? Keep in mind, from a committee perspective, Microsoft has the potential to offer a lot. Simply having support in Internet Explorer so that it gains widespread support would be a lot.</p><p>Not that I believe Microsoft to have good intentions, mind you. But the requirement for them to implement SVG in their browser could result in significant wasted effort on their part (assuming they are in it for the right reasons and want to push SVG themselves). At the same time it provides absolutely no guarantee that they will not push SVG into a worse state once they do implement SVG and become a committee member (assuming they're in it for the wrong reasons).</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE , they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.Until they implement the current SVG standards , they should be kept away .
[ Opinions mine , not IBM 's .
] Assuming that Microsoft would like to help refine the standard because the standard is broken ( for their needs ) , does it really make sense that they need to implement a standard just so they can help redefine the standard and implement that ?
Keep in mind , from a committee perspective , Microsoft has the potential to offer a lot .
Simply having support in Internet Explorer so that it gains widespread support would be a lot.Not that I believe Microsoft to have good intentions , mind you .
But the requirement for them to implement SVG in their browser could result in significant wasted effort on their part ( assuming they are in it for the right reasons and want to push SVG themselves ) .
At the same time it provides absolutely no guarantee that they will not push SVG into a worse state once they do implement SVG and become a committee member ( assuming they 're in it for the wrong reasons ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.
[Opinions mine, not IBM's.
]Assuming that Microsoft would like to help refine the standard because the standard is broken (for their needs), does it really make sense that they need to implement a standard just so they can help redefine the standard and implement that?
Keep in mind, from a committee perspective, Microsoft has the potential to offer a lot.
Simply having support in Internet Explorer so that it gains widespread support would be a lot.Not that I believe Microsoft to have good intentions, mind you.
But the requirement for them to implement SVG in their browser could result in significant wasted effort on their part (assuming they are in it for the right reasons and want to push SVG themselves).
At the same time it provides absolutely no guarantee that they will not push SVG into a worse state once they do implement SVG and become a committee member (assuming they're in it for the wrong reasons).
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675934</id>
	<title>LMFAO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262776980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>hahahha it's quite funny because M$ sucks fat wang when it comes to standards. It must be because Linux uses svg for tons of icons etc....</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>hahahha it 's quite funny because M $ sucks fat wang when it comes to standards .
It must be because Linux uses svg for tons of icons etc... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>hahahha it's quite funny because M$ sucks fat wang when it comes to standards.
It must be because Linux uses svg for tons of icons etc....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674670</id>
	<title>Could VML have been a contender?</title>
	<author>mrFur</author>
	<datestamp>1262771340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I couldn't be called a Micro$oft fan, but VML (while as painful as programming a TI-38) was useful in IE only environments (a man has to eat), and Microsoft tried to go down the standards route (http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-VML).  The fact that VML was never adopted outside of IE, combined with lack of features, effectively killed it.  What I did find annoying was the fact that MS locked down the office extensions to VML rather than continuing down a standards path - all those pretty pictures you can generated in power point can't be generated in the browser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I could n't be called a Micro $ oft fan , but VML ( while as painful as programming a TI-38 ) was useful in IE only environments ( a man has to eat ) , and Microsoft tried to go down the standards route ( http : //www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-VML ) .
The fact that VML was never adopted outside of IE , combined with lack of features , effectively killed it .
What I did find annoying was the fact that MS locked down the office extensions to VML rather than continuing down a standards path - all those pretty pictures you can generated in power point ca n't be generated in the browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I couldn't be called a Micro$oft fan, but VML (while as painful as programming a TI-38) was useful in IE only environments (a man has to eat), and Microsoft tried to go down the standards route (http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-VML).
The fact that VML was never adopted outside of IE, combined with lack of features, effectively killed it.
What I did find annoying was the fact that MS locked down the office extensions to VML rather than continuing down a standards path - all those pretty pictures you can generated in power point can't be generated in the browser.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674386</id>
	<title>Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1262769960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Or HTML.</p><p>We should make pictures similar to the <a href="http://encyclopediadramatica.com/John\_Locke" title="encycloped...matica.com">John Locke fucks things up (expand gallery)</a> [encycloped...matica.com] ones, but with Microsoft in the middle picture.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Or HTML.We should make pictures similar to the John Locke fucks things up ( expand gallery ) [ encycloped...matica.com ] ones , but with Microsoft in the middle picture .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or HTML.We should make pictures similar to the John Locke fucks things up (expand gallery) [encycloped...matica.com] ones, but with Microsoft in the middle picture.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30690284</id>
	<title>Re:Resist! its just OOXML all over again</title>
	<author>Simetrical</author>
	<datestamp>1262877960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Here we go again: <a href="http://noooxml.wikidot.com/" title="wikidot.com">http://noooxml.wikidot.com/</a> [wikidot.com] </p><p>"Committee stuffing is a standard practice for Microsoft. Microsoft raped ISO with their office file formats, leaving the organization in limbo. The whole campaign against the format have raised an army of people, which are furious about the dirty tactics used by Microsoft to get the broken standard through ISO. This anger won't go away, and I wish good luck to Microsoft to get it adopted by governments. The reputation of Microsoft went down below zero with this process."</p></div><p>The SVG Working Group is composed of . . . well, it seems to be <a href="http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/Membership" title="w3.org">"query failed"</a> [w3.org] right now.  But anyway, each organization gets one vote.  It's made up of Microsoft's competitors.  Microsoft cannot stuff the committee, it's not possible within W3C procedures, unless they get lots of little organizations to join and pay them to swing the vote.  Which they've never done in well over a decade of W3C membership, despite being members of the Working Groups for CSS, Web Fonts, HTML, etc., etc.  So no, they're probably joining the committee to influence the standard because they want to implement it and have feedback.  Like every other implementer.  Even if their motives differ a bit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Here we go again : http : //noooxml.wikidot.com/ [ wikidot.com ] " Committee stuffing is a standard practice for Microsoft .
Microsoft raped ISO with their office file formats , leaving the organization in limbo .
The whole campaign against the format have raised an army of people , which are furious about the dirty tactics used by Microsoft to get the broken standard through ISO .
This anger wo n't go away , and I wish good luck to Microsoft to get it adopted by governments .
The reputation of Microsoft went down below zero with this process .
" The SVG Working Group is composed of .
. .
well , it seems to be " query failed " [ w3.org ] right now .
But anyway , each organization gets one vote .
It 's made up of Microsoft 's competitors .
Microsoft can not stuff the committee , it 's not possible within W3C procedures , unless they get lots of little organizations to join and pay them to swing the vote .
Which they 've never done in well over a decade of W3C membership , despite being members of the Working Groups for CSS , Web Fonts , HTML , etc. , etc .
So no , they 're probably joining the committee to influence the standard because they want to implement it and have feedback .
Like every other implementer .
Even if their motives differ a bit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here we go again: http://noooxml.wikidot.com/ [wikidot.com] "Committee stuffing is a standard practice for Microsoft.
Microsoft raped ISO with their office file formats, leaving the organization in limbo.
The whole campaign against the format have raised an army of people, which are furious about the dirty tactics used by Microsoft to get the broken standard through ISO.
This anger won't go away, and I wish good luck to Microsoft to get it adopted by governments.
The reputation of Microsoft went down below zero with this process.
"The SVG Working Group is composed of .
. .
well, it seems to be "query failed" [w3.org] right now.
But anyway, each organization gets one vote.
It's made up of Microsoft's competitors.
Microsoft cannot stuff the committee, it's not possible within W3C procedures, unless they get lots of little organizations to join and pay them to swing the vote.
Which they've never done in well over a decade of W3C membership, despite being members of the Working Groups for CSS, Web Fonts, HTML, etc., etc.
So no, they're probably joining the committee to influence the standard because they want to implement it and have feedback.
Like every other implementer.
Even if their motives differ a bit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674046</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673964</id>
	<title>Two Words</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262811480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><strong>Embrace</strong> and <strong>Extend</strong>.<br>
&nbsp; <br>And in the process totally destroy what was once a thing of beauty.<br>
&nbsp; <br>They've done it before, and odds are they'll do it again.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Embrace and Extend .
  And in the process totally destroy what was once a thing of beauty .
  They 've done it before , and odds are they 'll do it again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Embrace and Extend.
  And in the process totally destroy what was once a thing of beauty.
  They've done it before, and odds are they'll do it again.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675186</id>
	<title>Be vewy, vewy quiet....</title>
	<author>XB-70</author>
	<datestamp>1262773800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Psssttt!!! Hehwo! I'm MS Fudd and I'm going to catch us a vectoh gwaphics standahd - but you have to be vewy, vewy quiet about what you awer going to do..
<p>
We wiwl pwetend to be fwends wif him - then sneak up on the widdow fellah and bwast 'im!!!
</p><p>
Cawfuw - don't let anybody know!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Psssttt ! ! !
Hehwo ! I 'm MS Fudd and I 'm going to catch us a vectoh gwaphics standahd - but you have to be vewy , vewy quiet about what you awer going to do. . We wiwl pwetend to be fwends wif him - then sneak up on the widdow fellah and bwast 'im ! ! !
Cawfuw - do n't let anybody know ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Psssttt!!!
Hehwo! I'm MS Fudd and I'm going to catch us a vectoh gwaphics standahd - but you have to be vewy, vewy quiet about what you awer going to do..

We wiwl pwetend to be fwends wif him - then sneak up on the widdow fellah and bwast 'im!!!
Cawfuw - don't let anybody know!!
!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674590</id>
	<title>Re:SVG development?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262770800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>illustrator</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>illustrator</tokentext>
<sentencetext>illustrator</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673978</id>
	<title>They are already on the working group</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262811540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft is <a href="http://www.w3.org/2000/09/dbwg/details?group=19480&amp;public=1&amp;gs=1&amp;" title="w3.org" rel="nofollow">already on the working group</a> [w3.org].  Are they saying that after years of dragging their feet and dragging the process out as long as possible, now that the standard is gaining traction, that, well, yes, it's time to come out of the cold?  What a bunch of maroons.  Based on a lifetime of experience in IT, I don't trust them any farther than I can spit.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft is already on the working group [ w3.org ] .
Are they saying that after years of dragging their feet and dragging the process out as long as possible , now that the standard is gaining traction , that , well , yes , it 's time to come out of the cold ?
What a bunch of maroons .
Based on a lifetime of experience in IT , I do n't trust them any farther than I can spit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft is already on the working group [w3.org].
Are they saying that after years of dragging their feet and dragging the process out as long as possible, now that the standard is gaining traction, that, well, yes, it's time to come out of the cold?
What a bunch of maroons.
Based on a lifetime of experience in IT, I don't trust them any farther than I can spit.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674214</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262769180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The laughable part is Microsoft has been supported VML for over a decade. If they can render one vector language, what's the big deal about rendering SVG?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The laughable part is Microsoft has been supported VML for over a decade .
If they can render one vector language , what 's the big deal about rendering SVG ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The laughable part is Microsoft has been supported VML for over a decade.
If they can render one vector language, what's the big deal about rendering SVG?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674414</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262770020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last moment</p></div><p>I don't know, but that "l" managed to slide a couple characters at the last moment before you hit submit.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last momentI do n't know , but that " l " managed to slide a couple characters at the last moment before you hit submit .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last momentI don't know, but that "l" managed to slide a couple characters at the last moment before you hit submit.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675176</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>Vahokif</author>
	<datestamp>1262773740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You have no idea what you're talking about. XAML is an XML-based UI markup language like XUL.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You have no idea what you 're talking about .
XAML is an XML-based UI markup language like XUL .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have no idea what you're talking about.
XAML is an XML-based UI markup language like XUL.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673708</id>
	<title>LOL.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262810340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha. Funny, funny.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha .
Funny , funny .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha.
Funny, funny.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674168</id>
	<title>The 3 E's</title>
	<author>Slash.Poop</author>
	<datestamp>1262769060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Embrace<br>
Extend<br>
Enhance</htmltext>
<tokenext>Embrace Extend Enhance</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Embrace
Extend
Enhance</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30689850</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>CAIMLAS</author>
	<datestamp>1262873160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The idea is simple; they've done it before and they'll do it again: say they'll support something, and when people see it supports $otherTech they buy on, thinking what they've been using, or wanting to use, will work. Then Microsoft will break it and say "you should've stuck with all-Microsoft technologies". Meanwhile, anyone using the non-Microsoft technologies will get burned and gun-shy, and be less likely to step off the path in the future (we're thinking of business types here). That's where the "profit" comes in.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The idea is simple ; they 've done it before and they 'll do it again : say they 'll support something , and when people see it supports $ otherTech they buy on , thinking what they 've been using , or wanting to use , will work .
Then Microsoft will break it and say " you should 've stuck with all-Microsoft technologies " .
Meanwhile , anyone using the non-Microsoft technologies will get burned and gun-shy , and be less likely to step off the path in the future ( we 're thinking of business types here ) .
That 's where the " profit " comes in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The idea is simple; they've done it before and they'll do it again: say they'll support something, and when people see it supports $otherTech they buy on, thinking what they've been using, or wanting to use, will work.
Then Microsoft will break it and say "you should've stuck with all-Microsoft technologies".
Meanwhile, anyone using the non-Microsoft technologies will get burned and gun-shy, and be less likely to step off the path in the future (we're thinking of business types here).
That's where the "profit" comes in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673830</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674710</id>
	<title>Re:SVG development?</title>
	<author>donatzsky</author>
	<datestamp>1262771520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I haven't tried it myself, but there's also <a href="http://sk1project.org/" title="sk1project.org" rel="nofollow">sK1</a> [sk1project.org].</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have n't tried it myself , but there 's also sK1 [ sk1project.org ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I haven't tried it myself, but there's also sK1 [sk1project.org].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734</id>
	<title>This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262810400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>

So basically you tried to shove your own proprietary format (XAML?) down our throats but that didn't work.  So you thought you'd wait it out and see who had the biggest cajones in this game of chicken where people had to pick?  But then Google and Adobe just made plugins for IE that made SVG work which kind of let the air out of your tires.  And now, before you've even implemented the SVG Tiny spec in Internet Explorer you are saying things like 'We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next-generation Web platform'?  So where would that leave IE since it has not implemented said important component of next-generation web platforms?<br> <br>

So you basically want a say in which direction the spec takes from now on without having proven to anyone that you are truly committed to this?  <br> <br>

Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last moment and hope everyone forgets about your blatant disregard for SVG and make it seem like SVG had always been in your plans but you're only now just getting around to it?  <br> <br>

I mean, you're looking mighty foolish now no matter which route you take.  <br> <br>

All that angst and animosity aside, I applaud this action.  Get it implemented in IE right now so I can start writing crap that utilizes basic graphics without having to post an unnecessarily large image for a flow chart and we can start to carve down the Flash usage out there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So basically you tried to shove your own proprietary format ( XAML ?
) down our throats but that did n't work .
So you thought you 'd wait it out and see who had the biggest cajones in this game of chicken where people had to pick ?
But then Google and Adobe just made plugins for IE that made SVG work which kind of let the air out of your tires .
And now , before you 've even implemented the SVG Tiny spec in Internet Explorer you are saying things like 'We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next-generation Web platform ' ?
So where would that leave IE since it has not implemented said important component of next-generation web platforms ?
So you basically want a say in which direction the spec takes from now on without having proven to anyone that you are truly committed to this ?
Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last moment and hope everyone forgets about your blatant disregard for SVG and make it seem like SVG had always been in your plans but you 're only now just getting around to it ?
I mean , you 're looking mighty foolish now no matter which route you take .
All that angst and animosity aside , I applaud this action .
Get it implemented in IE right now so I can start writing crap that utilizes basic graphics without having to post an unnecessarily large image for a flow chart and we can start to carve down the Flash usage out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>

So basically you tried to shove your own proprietary format (XAML?
) down our throats but that didn't work.
So you thought you'd wait it out and see who had the biggest cajones in this game of chicken where people had to pick?
But then Google and Adobe just made plugins for IE that made SVG work which kind of let the air out of your tires.
And now, before you've even implemented the SVG Tiny spec in Internet Explorer you are saying things like 'We recognize that vector graphics are an important component of the next-generation Web platform'?
So where would that leave IE since it has not implemented said important component of next-generation web platforms?
So you basically want a say in which direction the spec takes from now on without having proven to anyone that you are truly committed to this?
Or is this some hilarious attempt to sidle in at the last moment and hope everyone forgets about your blatant disregard for SVG and make it seem like SVG had always been in your plans but you're only now just getting around to it?
I mean, you're looking mighty foolish now no matter which route you take.
All that angst and animosity aside, I applaud this action.
Get it implemented in IE right now so I can start writing crap that utilizes basic graphics without having to post an unnecessarily large image for a flow chart and we can start to carve down the Flash usage out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30690248</id>
	<title>Re:Torpedo?</title>
	<author>Simetrical</author>
	<datestamp>1262877480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Actually, microsoft's recent track record with the W3C is quite positive. In IE8 they implemented full support for CSS 2.1 (they even released a large test suite to help the other browsers improve their CSS 2.1 support) and a decent level of support for WAI ARIA (accessibility spec). They also looked ahead and implemented native json encoding/decoding (part of HTML5), and the web storage spec (yet to be finalized). And they've contributed positively to the HTML5 working group.</p></div><p>I agree with all of those except the last.  Microsoft has been virtually silent in the HTMLWG.  There were a few posts by Adrian Bateman, and one or two other people who posted something and then usually let it hang without further discussion, but that's about it.  They even employ one of the three co-chairs, Paul Cotton, but he says very little that's not strictly administrative.  The impression I get is that the developers don't freely engage in discussion, just drop off collective feedback and watch what happens.

</p><p>In contrast, Microsoft employees have been very active in some WG mailing lists I've subscribed to, like the CSS and font WGs.  Dunno what the deal is with HTML5, but it doesn't seem like what Microsoft's most focused on right now.  I'd be surprised to see large-scale HTML5 implementation in IE9, although I'm sure they'll add a few more features.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , microsoft 's recent track record with the W3C is quite positive .
In IE8 they implemented full support for CSS 2.1 ( they even released a large test suite to help the other browsers improve their CSS 2.1 support ) and a decent level of support for WAI ARIA ( accessibility spec ) .
They also looked ahead and implemented native json encoding/decoding ( part of HTML5 ) , and the web storage spec ( yet to be finalized ) .
And they 've contributed positively to the HTML5 working group.I agree with all of those except the last .
Microsoft has been virtually silent in the HTMLWG .
There were a few posts by Adrian Bateman , and one or two other people who posted something and then usually let it hang without further discussion , but that 's about it .
They even employ one of the three co-chairs , Paul Cotton , but he says very little that 's not strictly administrative .
The impression I get is that the developers do n't freely engage in discussion , just drop off collective feedback and watch what happens .
In contrast , Microsoft employees have been very active in some WG mailing lists I 've subscribed to , like the CSS and font WGs .
Dunno what the deal is with HTML5 , but it does n't seem like what Microsoft 's most focused on right now .
I 'd be surprised to see large-scale HTML5 implementation in IE9 , although I 'm sure they 'll add a few more features .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, microsoft's recent track record with the W3C is quite positive.
In IE8 they implemented full support for CSS 2.1 (they even released a large test suite to help the other browsers improve their CSS 2.1 support) and a decent level of support for WAI ARIA (accessibility spec).
They also looked ahead and implemented native json encoding/decoding (part of HTML5), and the web storage spec (yet to be finalized).
And they've contributed positively to the HTML5 working group.I agree with all of those except the last.
Microsoft has been virtually silent in the HTMLWG.
There were a few posts by Adrian Bateman, and one or two other people who posted something and then usually let it hang without further discussion, but that's about it.
They even employ one of the three co-chairs, Paul Cotton, but he says very little that's not strictly administrative.
The impression I get is that the developers don't freely engage in discussion, just drop off collective feedback and watch what happens.
In contrast, Microsoft employees have been very active in some WG mailing lists I've subscribed to, like the CSS and font WGs.
Dunno what the deal is with HTML5, but it doesn't seem like what Microsoft's most focused on right now.
I'd be surprised to see large-scale HTML5 implementation in IE9, although I'm sure they'll add a few more features.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676000</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675446</id>
	<title>Designers tend to use Illustrator</title>
	<author>Sits</author>
	<datestamp>1262775060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>While I use Inkscape myself the designers I knew used Adobe Illustrator for vector work. And boy was some of their stuff good - what they could with that Bezier spline tool beggared belief. One guy's Illustrator portrait of his girlfriend looked like it was painted...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>While I use Inkscape myself the designers I knew used Adobe Illustrator for vector work .
And boy was some of their stuff good - what they could with that Bezier spline tool beggared belief .
One guy 's Illustrator portrait of his girlfriend looked like it was painted.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>While I use Inkscape myself the designers I knew used Adobe Illustrator for vector work.
And boy was some of their stuff good - what they could with that Bezier spline tool beggared belief.
One guy's Illustrator portrait of his girlfriend looked like it was painted...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674028</id>
	<title>66.43\% of browsers do not support SVG</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262768520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>SVG adoption needs Microsoft to gain critical mass.  <a href="http://www.statowl.com/web\_standards\_svg\_version\_support.php" title="statowl.com" rel="nofollow">66.43\% SVG figure is based on December StatOwl.com figures</a> [statowl.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>SVG adoption needs Microsoft to gain critical mass .
66.43 \ % SVG figure is based on December StatOwl.com figures [ statowl.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SVG adoption needs Microsoft to gain critical mass.
66.43\% SVG figure is based on December StatOwl.com figures [statowl.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674528</id>
	<title>itsatrap ...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262770500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What, no "itsatrap" tag on the story?  I'd add it myself, but I have no idea of how tags get added to stories.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-P</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What , no " itsatrap " tag on the story ?
I 'd add it myself , but I have no idea of how tags get added to stories .
: -P</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What, no "itsatrap" tag on the story?
I'd add it myself, but I have no idea of how tags get added to stories.
:-P</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674196</id>
	<title>Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT</title>
	<author>MiniMike</author>
	<datestamp>1262769120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Step 1: Embrace<br>Status: In Progress  &lt;laughter type="maniacal"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/&gt;</p><p>Step 2: Extend<br>Status: Inevitable</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Step 1 : EmbraceStatus : In Progress / &gt; Step 2 : ExtendStatus : Inevitable</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Step 1: EmbraceStatus: In Progress   /&gt;Step 2: ExtendStatus: Inevitable</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673726</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675226</id>
	<title>Too little, too late</title>
	<author>fretlessjazz</author>
	<datestamp>1262773980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If Microsoft had any hopes of retaining a shred of relevance in the next generation of browsers, they would be throwing their support behind HTML5 Canvas, not SVG.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If Microsoft had any hopes of retaining a shred of relevance in the next generation of browsers , they would be throwing their support behind HTML5 Canvas , not SVG .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If Microsoft had any hopes of retaining a shred of relevance in the next generation of browsers, they would be throwing their support behind HTML5 Canvas, not SVG.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673918</id>
	<title>Re:This Should Be Interesting</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262811300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What does XAML have to do with SVG?  Hell if you're going to bitch about XAML, maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too. They're equally unrelated.</p></div><p>Yeah seriously. XAML is a markup format for representing object trees in the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.net framework. End of discussion. It has NOTHING to do with vector graphics. In example, you can build a workflow in XAML if you so inclined. Just as easily, (well sorta) you can build a WPF without any XAML. Now granted, the choice of what objects you choose to represent themselves could be about vector graphics but that's the choice of classes and not the XAML.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What does XAML have to do with SVG ?
Hell if you 're going to bitch about XAML , maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too .
They 're equally unrelated.Yeah seriously .
XAML is a markup format for representing object trees in the .net framework .
End of discussion .
It has NOTHING to do with vector graphics .
In example , you can build a workflow in XAML if you so inclined .
Just as easily , ( well sorta ) you can build a WPF without any XAML .
Now granted , the choice of what objects you choose to represent themselves could be about vector graphics but that 's the choice of classes and not the XAML .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What does XAML have to do with SVG?
Hell if you're going to bitch about XAML, maybe you should complain about WinForms and MFC too.
They're equally unrelated.Yeah seriously.
XAML is a markup format for representing object trees in the .net framework.
End of discussion.
It has NOTHING to do with vector graphics.
In example, you can build a workflow in XAML if you so inclined.
Just as easily, (well sorta) you can build a WPF without any XAML.
Now granted, the choice of what objects you choose to represent themselves could be about vector graphics but that's the choice of classes and not the XAML.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673844</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676034</id>
	<title>I don't get it</title>
	<author>FirstTimeCaller</author>
	<datestamp>1262777520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>This whole SVG versus XAML thing never made sense to me.  The two seem incredibly similar.
<p>Consider SVG:</p><blockquote><div><p>path d="M153 334
C153 334 151 334 151 334
C151 339 153 344 156 344
C164 344 171 339 171 334
C171 322 164 314 156 314
C142 314 131 322 131 334
C131 350 142 364 156 364
C175 364 191 350 191 334
C191 311 175 294 156 294
C131 294 111 311 111 334
C111 361 131 384 156 384
C186 384 211 361 211 334
C211 300 186 274 156 274"
style="fill:white;stroke:red;stroke-width:2" /</p></div>
</blockquote><p> and the equivalent XAML:</p><blockquote><div><p>Path Data="M153 334 C153 334 151 334 151 334
C151 339 153 344 156 344
C164 344 171 339 171 334
C171 322 164 314 156 314
C142 314 131 322 131 334
C131 350 142 364 156 364
C175 364 191 350 191 334
C191 311 175 294 156 294
C131 294 111 311 111 334
C111 361 131 384 156 384
C186 384 211 361 211 334
C211 300 186 274 156 274"
Fill="White" Stroke="Red" StrokeThickness="2" /</p></div>
</blockquote><p>The two are so similar a simple Perl script could easily do the conversion.  So why the resistance to support SVG by Microsoft?  (Certainly the implementation is trivial given the Silverlight codebase).  And why the hating on XAML?  It seems obvious that its feature set was heavily influenced by SVG.</p><p>Let's merge the two (or not) and move on to more important things.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This whole SVG versus XAML thing never made sense to me .
The two seem incredibly similar .
Consider SVG : path d = " M153 334 C153 334 151 334 151 334 C151 339 153 344 156 344 C164 344 171 339 171 334 C171 322 164 314 156 314 C142 314 131 322 131 334 C131 350 142 364 156 364 C175 364 191 350 191 334 C191 311 175 294 156 294 C131 294 111 311 111 334 C111 361 131 384 156 384 C186 384 211 361 211 334 C211 300 186 274 156 274 " style = " fill : white ; stroke : red ; stroke-width : 2 " / and the equivalent XAML : Path Data = " M153 334 C153 334 151 334 151 334 C151 339 153 344 156 344 C164 344 171 339 171 334 C171 322 164 314 156 314 C142 314 131 322 131 334 C131 350 142 364 156 364 C175 364 191 350 191 334 C191 311 175 294 156 294 C131 294 111 311 111 334 C111 361 131 384 156 384 C186 384 211 361 211 334 C211 300 186 274 156 274 " Fill = " White " Stroke = " Red " StrokeThickness = " 2 " / The two are so similar a simple Perl script could easily do the conversion .
So why the resistance to support SVG by Microsoft ?
( Certainly the implementation is trivial given the Silverlight codebase ) .
And why the hating on XAML ?
It seems obvious that its feature set was heavily influenced by SVG.Let 's merge the two ( or not ) and move on to more important things .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This whole SVG versus XAML thing never made sense to me.
The two seem incredibly similar.
Consider SVG:path d="M153 334
C153 334 151 334 151 334
C151 339 153 344 156 344
C164 344 171 339 171 334
C171 322 164 314 156 314
C142 314 131 322 131 334
C131 350 142 364 156 364
C175 364 191 350 191 334
C191 311 175 294 156 294
C131 294 111 311 111 334
C111 361 131 384 156 384
C186 384 211 361 211 334
C211 300 186 274 156 274"
style="fill:white;stroke:red;stroke-width:2" /
 and the equivalent XAML:Path Data="M153 334 C153 334 151 334 151 334
C151 339 153 344 156 344
C164 344 171 339 171 334
C171 322 164 314 156 314
C142 314 131 322 131 334
C131 350 142 364 156 364
C175 364 191 350 191 334
C191 311 175 294 156 294
C131 294 111 311 111 334
C111 361 131 384 156 384
C186 384 211 361 211 334
C211 300 186 274 156 274"
Fill="White" Stroke="Red" StrokeThickness="2" /
The two are so similar a simple Perl script could easily do the conversion.
So why the resistance to support SVG by Microsoft?
(Certainly the implementation is trivial given the Silverlight codebase).
And why the hating on XAML?
It seems obvious that its feature set was heavily influenced by SVG.Let's merge the two (or not) and move on to more important things.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676000</id>
	<title>Re:Torpedo?</title>
	<author>jsebrech</author>
	<datestamp>1262777340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually, microsoft's recent track record with the W3C is quite positive. In IE8 they implemented full support for CSS 2.1 (they even released a large test suite to help the other browsers improve their CSS 2.1 support) and a decent level of support for WAI ARIA (accessibility spec). They also looked ahead and implemented native json encoding/decoding (part of HTML5), and the web storage spec (yet to be finalized). And they've contributed positively to the HTML5 working group.</p><p>So really, if you look at the past few years, there's no reason whatsoever to deny them access, because they've been pretty good W3C citizens.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually , microsoft 's recent track record with the W3C is quite positive .
In IE8 they implemented full support for CSS 2.1 ( they even released a large test suite to help the other browsers improve their CSS 2.1 support ) and a decent level of support for WAI ARIA ( accessibility spec ) .
They also looked ahead and implemented native json encoding/decoding ( part of HTML5 ) , and the web storage spec ( yet to be finalized ) .
And they 've contributed positively to the HTML5 working group.So really , if you look at the past few years , there 's no reason whatsoever to deny them access , because they 've been pretty good W3C citizens .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually, microsoft's recent track record with the W3C is quite positive.
In IE8 they implemented full support for CSS 2.1 (they even released a large test suite to help the other browsers improve their CSS 2.1 support) and a decent level of support for WAI ARIA (accessibility spec).
They also looked ahead and implemented native json encoding/decoding (part of HTML5), and the web storage spec (yet to be finalized).
And they've contributed positively to the HTML5 working group.So really, if you look at the past few years, there's no reason whatsoever to deny them access, because they've been pretty good W3C citizens.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673730</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30690296</id>
	<title>Re:That's nice</title>
	<author>Simetrical</author>
	<datestamp>1262878080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.</p><p>Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.</p><p>[Opinions mine, not IBM's.]</p></div><p>IBM happens to employ Sam Ruby, one of the co-chairs of the HTMLWG.  Would you say IBM should not be allowed to have its members in the HTMLWG to work on HTML5 until IBM has a working HTML4 implementation?  Because, you know, they don't, as far as I've heard.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE , they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.Until they implement the current SVG standards , they should be kept away .
[ Opinions mine , not IBM 's .
] IBM happens to employ Sam Ruby , one of the co-chairs of the HTMLWG .
Would you say IBM should not be allowed to have its members in the HTMLWG to work on HTML5 until IBM has a working HTML4 implementation ?
Because , you know , they do n't , as far as I 've heard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.Until they implement the current SVG standards, they should be kept away.
[Opinions mine, not IBM's.
]IBM happens to employ Sam Ruby, one of the co-chairs of the HTMLWG.
Would you say IBM should not be allowed to have its members in the HTMLWG to work on HTML5 until IBM has a working HTML4 implementation?
Because, you know, they don't, as far as I've heard.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673766</id>
	<title>Fun</title>
	<author>cheesybagel</author>
	<datestamp>1262810580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So they are no longer pushing their own proprietary VML vector format? Ah well. Since Adobe bought Macromedia SVG needs more people pushing it. The saving grace has been that some browsers (e.g. Firefox) natively support SVG now. So this is good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So they are no longer pushing their own proprietary VML vector format ?
Ah well .
Since Adobe bought Macromedia SVG needs more people pushing it .
The saving grace has been that some browsers ( e.g .
Firefox ) natively support SVG now .
So this is good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So they are no longer pushing their own proprietary VML vector format?
Ah well.
Since Adobe bought Macromedia SVG needs more people pushing it.
The saving grace has been that some browsers (e.g.
Firefox) natively support SVG now.
So this is good.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674578</id>
	<title>Re:Executable code, here we come</title>
	<author>adpe</author>
	<datestamp>1262770740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Thank you. A lot of people know about the "E&amp;E&amp;E" punchline, but very few actually actually understand how it works. I was thinking exactly the same, but you posted it first. Mod parent up. Well, if he wasn't at +5 already.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Thank you .
A lot of people know about the " E&amp;E&amp;E " punchline , but very few actually actually understand how it works .
I was thinking exactly the same , but you posted it first .
Mod parent up .
Well , if he was n't at + 5 already .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thank you.
A lot of people know about the "E&amp;E&amp;E" punchline, but very few actually actually understand how it works.
I was thinking exactly the same, but you posted it first.
Mod parent up.
Well, if he wasn't at +5 already.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674050</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674470</id>
	<title>Re:Oh thank you so very much.... NOT</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1262770260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>You need to review the concept of markup...</htmltext>
<tokenext>You need to review the concept of markup.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You need to review the concept of markup...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674196</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742</id>
	<title>SVG development?</title>
	<author>Bananatree3</author>
	<datestamp>1262810460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>What do you developers prefer as a development environment? I personally use <a href="http://www.inkscape.org/" title="inkscape.org">Inkscape</a> [inkscape.org], an open source Vector graphics editor. What does Slashdot like to use?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you developers prefer as a development environment ?
I personally use Inkscape [ inkscape.org ] , an open source Vector graphics editor .
What does Slashdot like to use ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you developers prefer as a development environment?
I personally use Inkscape [inkscape.org], an open source Vector graphics editor.
What does Slashdot like to use?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676204</id>
	<title>Re:That's nice</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1262778420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.</p></div><p>There is a difference between "refining" and "extending".</p><p>"Refining" is when you say, "oh, you know, I've tried to implement the spec, but paragraph 3 of section 13.4 is contradictory to paragraph 5 of section 7.9, and feature described by section 11.2 is underspecified, because it is not clear how case X should be handled, and nor it is stated that it's implementation-defined" - and then work together with other people working on the standard to ensure that all ambiguities are removed, all underspecified bits are properly specified, etc. That is a perfectly normal activity to engage in for any implementer.</p><p>"Extending" is when you say, "What a nice format you have here! But it would be even better if you also add features X, Y and Z to it, and I even have specs for those at hand". That is a different story, but for some reason people keep forgetting that MS works quite successfully and productively in many standard committees, and have done so for years; for example, ISO WG21 (The C++ Standards Committee) - Herb Sutter, an MS representative in the committee, submitted several proposals that made their way into C++0x, and served as a convener and secretary from 1998 to 2008.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE , they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.There is a difference between " refining " and " extending " .
" Refining " is when you say , " oh , you know , I 've tried to implement the spec , but paragraph 3 of section 13.4 is contradictory to paragraph 5 of section 7.9 , and feature described by section 11.2 is underspecified , because it is not clear how case X should be handled , and nor it is stated that it 's implementation-defined " - and then work together with other people working on the standard to ensure that all ambiguities are removed , all underspecified bits are properly specified , etc .
That is a perfectly normal activity to engage in for any implementer .
" Extending " is when you say , " What a nice format you have here !
But it would be even better if you also add features X , Y and Z to it , and I even have specs for those at hand " .
That is a different story , but for some reason people keep forgetting that MS works quite successfully and productively in many standard committees , and have done so for years ; for example , ISO WG21 ( The C + + Standards Committee ) - Herb Sutter , an MS representative in the committee , submitted several proposals that made their way into C + + 0x , and served as a convener and secretary from 1998 to 2008 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As soon as Microsoft implements the current SVG standards in IE, they should be welcomed into the process of refining the standards further.There is a difference between "refining" and "extending".
"Refining" is when you say, "oh, you know, I've tried to implement the spec, but paragraph 3 of section 13.4 is contradictory to paragraph 5 of section 7.9, and feature described by section 11.2 is underspecified, because it is not clear how case X should be handled, and nor it is stated that it's implementation-defined" - and then work together with other people working on the standard to ensure that all ambiguities are removed, all underspecified bits are properly specified, etc.
That is a perfectly normal activity to engage in for any implementer.
"Extending" is when you say, "What a nice format you have here!
But it would be even better if you also add features X, Y and Z to it, and I even have specs for those at hand".
That is a different story, but for some reason people keep forgetting that MS works quite successfully and productively in many standard committees, and have done so for years; for example, ISO WG21 (The C++ Standards Committee) - Herb Sutter, an MS representative in the committee, submitted several proposals that made their way into C++0x, and served as a convener and secretary from 1998 to 2008.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674518
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675362
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674494
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676204
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673818
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30678902
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676306
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676032
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673708
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30690284
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677478
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674994
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30683834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675428
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30678758
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677594
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674304
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675176
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674386
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676096
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675446
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674214
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674050
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674788
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673844
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674418
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674414
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673822
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675476
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673936
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675090
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674196
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673726
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676236
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673878
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675334
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675094
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30690248
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676000
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673730
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30682736
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674046
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674710
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30689850
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673830
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673754
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_06_1829223_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30690296
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673730
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675094
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30683834
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676412
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676000
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30690248
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674102
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677478
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675090
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674000
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674304
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674710
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675446
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674590
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673726
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674196
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674470
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675158
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674386
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673936
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674494
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675476
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674418
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673754
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673878
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674750
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673734
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675362
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673984
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675176
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673914
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674414
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677944
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673830
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675428
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674214
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30689850
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673844
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674788
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674062
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676096
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673818
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673708
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676032
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676306
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30678902
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674168
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673766
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674050
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30677594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30678758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674994
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673890
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674576
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674046
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30690284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30682736
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30673822
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674518
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674366
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674148
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675220
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675334
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676236
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30690296
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30676204
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30675684
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_06_1829223.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_06_1829223.30674028
</commentlist>
</conversation>
