<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_01_29_1357203</id>
	<title>Denmark Chooses OpenDocument Format</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1264779180000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:ttsNO@SPAMimage.dk" rel="nofollow">Seahawk</a> was one of several readers to write in with news of <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&amp;prev=\_t&amp;hl=en&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;layout=1&amp;eotf=1&amp;u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fpolitiken.dk\%2Ftjek\%2Fdigitalt\%2Fcomputer\%2Farticle890130.ece&amp;sl=da&amp;tl=en">Denmark's decision to embrace ODF</a>. <i>"On Friday morning Denmark <a href="http://translate.google.com/translate?js=y&amp;prev=\_t&amp;hl=en&amp;ie=UTF-8&amp;layout=1&amp;eotf=1&amp;u=http\%3A\%2F\%2Fwww.version2.dk\%2Fartikel\%2F13690-breaking-odf-vinder-dokumentformatkrig&amp;sl=da&amp;tl=en">decided to choose ODF over Microsoft's OOXML</a>. For now the decision is only effective for governmental institutions, but regions and municipalities will most likely follow some time in the future. The decision has unfolded over a period of four years, and many open source advocates were fearing the worst, but it looks like the minister finally caved in and listened to what a lot of people were saying."</i> While in transition away from Microsoft Office formats, the Danes may find use for this new <a href="http://www.blog.geid.co.uk/">OpenOffice integration guide</a> (sent in by reader <a href="http://slashdot.org/~AdeleWard">AdeleWard</a>).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seahawk was one of several readers to write in with news of Denmark 's decision to embrace ODF .
" On Friday morning Denmark decided to choose ODF over Microsoft 's OOXML .
For now the decision is only effective for governmental institutions , but regions and municipalities will most likely follow some time in the future .
The decision has unfolded over a period of four years , and many open source advocates were fearing the worst , but it looks like the minister finally caved in and listened to what a lot of people were saying .
" While in transition away from Microsoft Office formats , the Danes may find use for this new OpenOffice integration guide ( sent in by reader AdeleWard ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seahawk was one of several readers to write in with news of Denmark's decision to embrace ODF.
"On Friday morning Denmark decided to choose ODF over Microsoft's OOXML.
For now the decision is only effective for governmental institutions, but regions and municipalities will most likely follow some time in the future.
The decision has unfolded over a period of four years, and many open source advocates were fearing the worst, but it looks like the minister finally caved in and listened to what a lot of people were saying.
" While in transition away from Microsoft Office formats, the Danes may find use for this new OpenOffice integration guide (sent in by reader AdeleWard).</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953952</id>
	<title>Re:ODF spreading like wildfire</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1264798740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>In Europe we saw Belgium, Netherlands, Norway adopt ODF, now Denmark</p></div><p>Belgium: 10.4 mio people<br>Netherlands: 16.5 mio people<br>Norway: 4.9 mio people<br>Denmark: 5.5 mio people<br>Europe: 731 mio people</p><p>So 37.1/731 mio = 5.1\%. And I can't speak for the other countries, but the only requirement in Norway was that public information must be at least in either HTML, PDF or ODF - having DOCs is fine as long as it's not the only option and they can still use whatever tools they like internally. I have been working with one rather large government institution in Norway and there's thousands and thousands of MS Office copies and no plans to switch. They only care about ODF in the same way they care about screenreaders for the blind being able to read their pages, it's for total accessibility. Call it a wildfire if you like but I'm more worried someone'll accidentally step on it than anything else.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>In Europe we saw Belgium , Netherlands , Norway adopt ODF , now DenmarkBelgium : 10.4 mio peopleNetherlands : 16.5 mio peopleNorway : 4.9 mio peopleDenmark : 5.5 mio peopleEurope : 731 mio peopleSo 37.1/731 mio = 5.1 \ % .
And I ca n't speak for the other countries , but the only requirement in Norway was that public information must be at least in either HTML , PDF or ODF - having DOCs is fine as long as it 's not the only option and they can still use whatever tools they like internally .
I have been working with one rather large government institution in Norway and there 's thousands and thousands of MS Office copies and no plans to switch .
They only care about ODF in the same way they care about screenreaders for the blind being able to read their pages , it 's for total accessibility .
Call it a wildfire if you like but I 'm more worried someone 'll accidentally step on it than anything else .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In Europe we saw Belgium, Netherlands, Norway adopt ODF, now DenmarkBelgium: 10.4 mio peopleNetherlands: 16.5 mio peopleNorway: 4.9 mio peopleDenmark: 5.5 mio peopleEurope: 731 mio peopleSo 37.1/731 mio = 5.1\%.
And I can't speak for the other countries, but the only requirement in Norway was that public information must be at least in either HTML, PDF or ODF - having DOCs is fine as long as it's not the only option and they can still use whatever tools they like internally.
I have been working with one rather large government institution in Norway and there's thousands and thousands of MS Office copies and no plans to switch.
They only care about ODF in the same way they care about screenreaders for the blind being able to read their pages, it's for total accessibility.
Call it a wildfire if you like but I'm more worried someone'll accidentally step on it than anything else.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951224</id>
	<title>Re:ODF spreading like wildfire</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264787760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, thank god Denmark is making a stand against Microsoft! I mean, it's not like the EU approved the Sun-Oracle merger or something.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:Rolls eyes towards the heavens:</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , thank god Denmark is making a stand against Microsoft !
I mean , it 's not like the EU approved the Sun-Oracle merger or something .
: Rolls eyes towards the heavens :</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, thank god Denmark is making a stand against Microsoft!
I mean, it's not like the EU approved the Sun-Oracle merger or something.
:Rolls eyes towards the heavens:</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953354</id>
	<title>Re:ODF spreading like wildfire</title>
	<author>fmrbastien</author>
	<datestamp>1264795680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I live in belgium and all files in the governement website are in pdf and doc...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I live in belgium and all files in the governement website are in pdf and doc.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I live in belgium and all files in the governement website are in pdf and doc...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950146</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264783800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Either you are a troll, or you fail at free-market libertarianism.<br> <br>

The state, in order to conduct its necessary business, needs to use some sort of document format. Even the most minimal of states would have to at least write the law code down somewhere.<br> <br>

The document format that the state uses affects the citizens of the state; because they must possess software capable of interpreting that format in order to usefully interact with the state.<br> <br>

Therefore, the state's use of a document format constitutes a state-imposed market distortion in favor of software that can interpret that format, and against software that cannot. Because the state's use of some document format is unavoidable, the imposition of this market distortion is unavoidable.<br> <br>

The more openly available, and widely adopted, and patent unencumbered the format is, the lower the barrier of entry to supporting it is, and the greater the amount of software that can support it will be. Therefore, the more open the document standard used by the state, the smaller the market distortion imposed by the state.<br> <br>

Any free market libertarian is therefore obligated to support the state's use of the most open and least encumbered formats available.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Either you are a troll , or you fail at free-market libertarianism .
The state , in order to conduct its necessary business , needs to use some sort of document format .
Even the most minimal of states would have to at least write the law code down somewhere .
The document format that the state uses affects the citizens of the state ; because they must possess software capable of interpreting that format in order to usefully interact with the state .
Therefore , the state 's use of a document format constitutes a state-imposed market distortion in favor of software that can interpret that format , and against software that can not .
Because the state 's use of some document format is unavoidable , the imposition of this market distortion is unavoidable .
The more openly available , and widely adopted , and patent unencumbered the format is , the lower the barrier of entry to supporting it is , and the greater the amount of software that can support it will be .
Therefore , the more open the document standard used by the state , the smaller the market distortion imposed by the state .
Any free market libertarian is therefore obligated to support the state 's use of the most open and least encumbered formats available .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Either you are a troll, or you fail at free-market libertarianism.
The state, in order to conduct its necessary business, needs to use some sort of document format.
Even the most minimal of states would have to at least write the law code down somewhere.
The document format that the state uses affects the citizens of the state; because they must possess software capable of interpreting that format in order to usefully interact with the state.
Therefore, the state's use of a document format constitutes a state-imposed market distortion in favor of software that can interpret that format, and against software that cannot.
Because the state's use of some document format is unavoidable, the imposition of this market distortion is unavoidable.
The more openly available, and widely adopted, and patent unencumbered the format is, the lower the barrier of entry to supporting it is, and the greater the amount of software that can support it will be.
Therefore, the more open the document standard used by the state, the smaller the market distortion imposed by the state.
Any free market libertarian is therefore obligated to support the state's use of the most open and least encumbered formats available.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952842</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264793460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... And just WHY is a government choosing a format in which to keep its documents NOT an example of the "Invisible Hand" at work?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... And just WHY is a government choosing a format in which to keep its documents NOT an example of the " Invisible Hand " at work ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... And just WHY is a government choosing a format in which to keep its documents NOT an example of the "Invisible Hand" at work?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950514</id>
	<title>Re:Cost savings?</title>
	<author>KlaymenDK</author>
	<datestamp>1264785180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, not *having* to spend money in commercial software licenses?</p><p>It's the same old argument<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... why insist on having citizens pay for software so they can read official documents?</p><p>* If you force a free format, you can use any software you like -- including the same commercial software you've been using for years.<br>* But, if you force a commercial format, there is NO guarantee (almost like the opposite) that you can use any software you like -- even non-commercial.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , not * having * to spend money in commercial software licenses ? It 's the same old argument ... why insist on having citizens pay for software so they can read official documents ?
* If you force a free format , you can use any software you like -- including the same commercial software you 've been using for years .
* But , if you force a commercial format , there is NO guarantee ( almost like the opposite ) that you can use any software you like -- even non-commercial .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, not *having* to spend money in commercial software licenses?It's the same old argument ... why insist on having citizens pay for software so they can read official documents?
* If you force a free format, you can use any software you like -- including the same commercial software you've been using for years.
* But, if you force a commercial format, there is NO guarantee (almost like the opposite) that you can use any software you like -- even non-commercial.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951914</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264789980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There are lots of companies who make standard nuts, wires, screws, tires, gasolines, insulation, etc.</p><p>If the government were to define a few standard cell phone chargers, then multiple companies would compete and cell phone chargers would probably cost about $6.  Since they don't, off brand chargers are $13 and "brand" chargers from the cell store are $29.</p><p>Libertarian philosophy is fundamentally broken because it relies on a "magical" force to keep wealthy, powerful, individuals and companies in check and fails epically with regard to the iron law of oligarchy.</p><p>The only way libertarian philosophy can work is by having harsh taxes on anyone who passes a certain point of wealth and power such that we have many many "rich" people and no "super rich" people.</p><p>Since corporations are effectively immortal, psychopathic, wealthy and powerful people, we need a strong government to keep them in check lest they due things like dump toxins, allow us to be raped, take our property, fine us several lifetimes worth of income for downloading a couple dozen songs, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There are lots of companies who make standard nuts , wires , screws , tires , gasolines , insulation , etc.If the government were to define a few standard cell phone chargers , then multiple companies would compete and cell phone chargers would probably cost about $ 6 .
Since they do n't , off brand chargers are $ 13 and " brand " chargers from the cell store are $ 29.Libertarian philosophy is fundamentally broken because it relies on a " magical " force to keep wealthy , powerful , individuals and companies in check and fails epically with regard to the iron law of oligarchy.The only way libertarian philosophy can work is by having harsh taxes on anyone who passes a certain point of wealth and power such that we have many many " rich " people and no " super rich " people.Since corporations are effectively immortal , psychopathic , wealthy and powerful people , we need a strong government to keep them in check lest they due things like dump toxins , allow us to be raped , take our property , fine us several lifetimes worth of income for downloading a couple dozen songs , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There are lots of companies who make standard nuts, wires, screws, tires, gasolines, insulation, etc.If the government were to define a few standard cell phone chargers, then multiple companies would compete and cell phone chargers would probably cost about $6.
Since they don't, off brand chargers are $13 and "brand" chargers from the cell store are $29.Libertarian philosophy is fundamentally broken because it relies on a "magical" force to keep wealthy, powerful, individuals and companies in check and fails epically with regard to the iron law of oligarchy.The only way libertarian philosophy can work is by having harsh taxes on anyone who passes a certain point of wealth and power such that we have many many "rich" people and no "super rich" people.Since corporations are effectively immortal, psychopathic, wealthy and powerful people, we need a strong government to keep them in check lest they due things like dump toxins, allow us to be raped, take our property, fine us several lifetimes worth of income for downloading a couple dozen songs, etc.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950724</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1264785960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Incorrect. ODF increases your ability to interoperate with other people. Have you used Microsoft Office? It can't interoperate with its own older versions, and the reasons for that are entirely aimed at getting users to buy the latest version, nothing more.</p></div><p>So they'd lose more and more documents? I don't think you're thinking straight, they want it easy for people to upgrade and annoying for people who haven't. If Microsoft had any substantial degree of failure on that (no, anecdotes aren't proof) then Office would FAIL in company upgrade testing. "We are unable to migrate to Office 2007 because we would lose compatibility with vital documents and historical records". Do you see that happening? No, so reality doesn't care how many times that FUD is repeated over and over.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Incorrect .
ODF increases your ability to interoperate with other people .
Have you used Microsoft Office ?
It ca n't interoperate with its own older versions , and the reasons for that are entirely aimed at getting users to buy the latest version , nothing more.So they 'd lose more and more documents ?
I do n't think you 're thinking straight , they want it easy for people to upgrade and annoying for people who have n't .
If Microsoft had any substantial degree of failure on that ( no , anecdotes are n't proof ) then Office would FAIL in company upgrade testing .
" We are unable to migrate to Office 2007 because we would lose compatibility with vital documents and historical records " .
Do you see that happening ?
No , so reality does n't care how many times that FUD is repeated over and over .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Incorrect.
ODF increases your ability to interoperate with other people.
Have you used Microsoft Office?
It can't interoperate with its own older versions, and the reasons for that are entirely aimed at getting users to buy the latest version, nothing more.So they'd lose more and more documents?
I don't think you're thinking straight, they want it easy for people to upgrade and annoying for people who haven't.
If Microsoft had any substantial degree of failure on that (no, anecdotes aren't proof) then Office would FAIL in company upgrade testing.
"We are unable to migrate to Office 2007 because we would lose compatibility with vital documents and historical records".
Do you see that happening?
No, so reality doesn't care how many times that FUD is repeated over and over.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950158</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951150</id>
	<title>How/where was Denmark on the ISO debacle?</title>
	<author>erroneus</author>
	<datestamp>1264787460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When OOXML was being crammed through ISO through ballot stuffing, what was Denmark's position?  Were they involved at all?  If they were involved, did they vote yes or no?</p><p>No time to search that right now, but it would be an interesting question to know the answer to.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When OOXML was being crammed through ISO through ballot stuffing , what was Denmark 's position ?
Were they involved at all ?
If they were involved , did they vote yes or no ? No time to search that right now , but it would be an interesting question to know the answer to .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When OOXML was being crammed through ISO through ballot stuffing, what was Denmark's position?
Were they involved at all?
If they were involved, did they vote yes or no?No time to search that right now, but it would be an interesting question to know the answer to.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950466</id>
	<title>Re:Cost savings?</title>
	<author>jc79</author>
	<datestamp>1264785060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Free software exists that can edit this format. Offices can choose to use a free software package (ie OpenOffice.org) instead of a costly proprietary one (MS Office), therefore saving money on software licenses.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Free software exists that can edit this format .
Offices can choose to use a free software package ( ie OpenOffice.org ) instead of a costly proprietary one ( MS Office ) , therefore saving money on software licenses .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Free software exists that can edit this format.
Offices can choose to use a free software package (ie OpenOffice.org) instead of a costly proprietary one (MS Office), therefore saving money on software licenses.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951268</id>
	<title>Re:ODF spreading like wildfire</title>
	<author>Terrasque</author>
	<datestamp>1264787880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The US?</p><p>Ba-da-bing! Thank you all, try the waitress.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The US ? Ba-da-bing !
Thank you all , try the waitress .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US?Ba-da-bing!
Thank you all, try the waitress.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951334</id>
	<title>is there any reasonable person who will tell me</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264788120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>why the parent is modded as 'flamebait', in a reasonable manner ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>why the parent is modded as 'flamebait ' , in a reasonable manner ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>why the parent is modded as 'flamebait', in a reasonable manner ?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949918</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950238</id>
	<title>Cost savings?</title>
	<author>Orlando</author>
	<datestamp>1264784160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>It can be used in offices where other file formats are used and represents a great cost saving for organisations</i></p><p>What costs are saved by adopting this file format?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It can be used in offices where other file formats are used and represents a great cost saving for organisationsWhat costs are saved by adopting this file format ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It can be used in offices where other file formats are used and represents a great cost saving for organisationsWhat costs are saved by adopting this file format?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950956</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>smbell</author>
	<datestamp>1264786740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hmmm.

So what you're saying is, as a free market libertarian, the correct decision is to encode government documents in such a way that citizens would be required to pay for a product from a specific private company in order to have access to them because that private companies products are currently popular.

And by extension you see to think this is better than placing the documents into a format that is open defined such that any vendor (including the popular vendor in the previous setup) are able to provide access, with the added bonus that decades from now those documents will still be readable (while the proprietary single vendor format would only be readable as long as the vendor continues to support it).

For some strange reason I question either your stated position as a free market libertarian, or your intelligence.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hmmm .
So what you 're saying is , as a free market libertarian , the correct decision is to encode government documents in such a way that citizens would be required to pay for a product from a specific private company in order to have access to them because that private companies products are currently popular .
And by extension you see to think this is better than placing the documents into a format that is open defined such that any vendor ( including the popular vendor in the previous setup ) are able to provide access , with the added bonus that decades from now those documents will still be readable ( while the proprietary single vendor format would only be readable as long as the vendor continues to support it ) .
For some strange reason I question either your stated position as a free market libertarian , or your intelligence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hmmm.
So what you're saying is, as a free market libertarian, the correct decision is to encode government documents in such a way that citizens would be required to pay for a product from a specific private company in order to have access to them because that private companies products are currently popular.
And by extension you see to think this is better than placing the documents into a format that is open defined such that any vendor (including the popular vendor in the previous setup) are able to provide access, with the added bonus that decades from now those documents will still be readable (while the proprietary single vendor format would only be readable as long as the vendor continues to support it).
For some strange reason I question either your stated position as a free market libertarian, or your intelligence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951146</id>
	<title>Microsoft Office is a  *program* not a format</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264787460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft Office is a  *program* not a format.  The standardization is about *formats* not software.  That is a common confusion fostered mostly by Microsoft, but perpetuated by those who aren't looking closely at the issue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft Office is a * program * not a format .
The standardization is about * formats * not software .
That is a common confusion fostered mostly by Microsoft , but perpetuated by those who are n't looking closely at the issue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft Office is a  *program* not a format.
The standardization is about *formats* not software.
That is a common confusion fostered mostly by Microsoft, but perpetuated by those who aren't looking closely at the issue.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30957606</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>ivucica</author>
	<datestamp>1264771620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Surprisingly the only company that does not make a plugin is MS itself.</p></div>  </blockquote><p>

I'll take the bait and post this despite my dislike for Microsoft.<br>
<br>
<a href="http://www.tectonic.co.za/?p=4800" title="tectonic.co.za">link</a> [tectonic.co.za] </p><blockquote><div><p>In a big step forward for interoperability, Microsoft&rsquo;s recently-released Service Pack 2 for Office 2007 includes built-in support for a range of additional file formats including the OpenDocument Format (ODF).</p></div></blockquote><p>
Also, <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/may08/05-21ExpandedFormatsPR.mspx" title="microsoft.com">their PR</a> [microsoft.com] </p><blockquote><div><p> When using SP2, customers will be able to open, edit and save documents using ODF and save documents into the XPS and PDF fixed formats from directly within the application without having to install any other code. It will also allow customers to <b>set ODF as the default</b> file format for Office 2007.</p></div> </blockquote><p>
Hm. No plugin, because no plugin is necessary, I presume.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Surprisingly the only company that does not make a plugin is MS itself .
I 'll take the bait and post this despite my dislike for Microsoft .
link [ tectonic.co.za ] In a big step forward for interoperability , Microsoft    s recently-released Service Pack 2 for Office 2007 includes built-in support for a range of additional file formats including the OpenDocument Format ( ODF ) .
Also , their PR [ microsoft.com ] When using SP2 , customers will be able to open , edit and save documents using ODF and save documents into the XPS and PDF fixed formats from directly within the application without having to install any other code .
It will also allow customers to set ODF as the default file format for Office 2007 .
Hm. No plugin , because no plugin is necessary , I presume .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Surprisingly the only company that does not make a plugin is MS itself.
I'll take the bait and post this despite my dislike for Microsoft.
link [tectonic.co.za] In a big step forward for interoperability, Microsoft’s recently-released Service Pack 2 for Office 2007 includes built-in support for a range of additional file formats including the OpenDocument Format (ODF).
Also, their PR [microsoft.com]  When using SP2, customers will be able to open, edit and save documents using ODF and save documents into the XPS and PDF fixed formats from directly within the application without having to install any other code.
It will also allow customers to set ODF as the default file format for Office 2007.
Hm. No plugin, because no plugin is necessary, I presume.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950386</id>
	<title>Danish government doesn't comply with own decision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264784760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Currently, the situation is, that ODF and OOXML must both be accepted, but there are several examples where only Microsoft dataformats are received. Therefore, it can not be expected, that this new decision will have full effect quickly.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Currently , the situation is , that ODF and OOXML must both be accepted , but there are several examples where only Microsoft dataformats are received .
Therefore , it can not be expected , that this new decision will have full effect quickly .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Currently, the situation is, that ODF and OOXML must both be accepted, but there are several examples where only Microsoft dataformats are received.
Therefore, it can not be expected, that this new decision will have full effect quickly.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30957522</id>
	<title>Re:Go Denmark!</title>
	<author>ivucica</author>
	<datestamp>1264771020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh, and I should probably mention rampant piracy too.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh , and I should probably mention rampant piracy too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh, and I should probably mention rampant piracy too.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951284</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004</id>
	<title>Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264783320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I know it is not popular around here, but come on folks, Microsoft Office is the standard format for doing business.  By taking this move, the Danish government has dealt themselves a blow to their ability to interoperate with other people.  Going forward this means higher costs will be needed by both the government and every company that does business with them, meaning higher taxes and a reduced standard of living.  As a free market libertarian, I think this move sucks, and anyone with half a brain should too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I know it is not popular around here , but come on folks , Microsoft Office is the standard format for doing business .
By taking this move , the Danish government has dealt themselves a blow to their ability to interoperate with other people .
Going forward this means higher costs will be needed by both the government and every company that does business with them , meaning higher taxes and a reduced standard of living .
As a free market libertarian , I think this move sucks , and anyone with half a brain should too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I know it is not popular around here, but come on folks, Microsoft Office is the standard format for doing business.
By taking this move, the Danish government has dealt themselves a blow to their ability to interoperate with other people.
Going forward this means higher costs will be needed by both the government and every company that does business with them, meaning higher taxes and a reduced standard of living.
As a free market libertarian, I think this move sucks, and anyone with half a brain should too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953384</id>
	<title>Re:Danish government doesn't comply with own decis</title>
	<author>Dan Ost</author>
	<datestamp>1264795860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The effect of this decision is that every official in the national government will have to publish official documents in ODF. I don't think this decision has any directives about the formats that the government officials can receive.</p><p>The obvious ripple effect of this decision is that everyone who consumes official documents will require software that can render an ODF document (and there are lots, so this will be easy). Since most software that can render ODF documents can also create ODF documents, it seems likely that the ability to create ODF documents will become ubiquitous among those who interact with the government.</p><p>It remains to be seen whether or not that will reduce the number of documents received by the government in non-ODF formats, but it certainly is possible since there must be some overlap between people who consume government documents and people who provide documents to the government.</p><p>As an open standards supporter, what excites me the most about this news is that the Danish government now has a vested interest in preserving the integrity of and perhaps even improving the ODF format. Vendors such as Microsoft will be less able to "get by" with substandard support for the format which, in turn, improves the experience of everyone using ODF.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The effect of this decision is that every official in the national government will have to publish official documents in ODF .
I do n't think this decision has any directives about the formats that the government officials can receive.The obvious ripple effect of this decision is that everyone who consumes official documents will require software that can render an ODF document ( and there are lots , so this will be easy ) .
Since most software that can render ODF documents can also create ODF documents , it seems likely that the ability to create ODF documents will become ubiquitous among those who interact with the government.It remains to be seen whether or not that will reduce the number of documents received by the government in non-ODF formats , but it certainly is possible since there must be some overlap between people who consume government documents and people who provide documents to the government.As an open standards supporter , what excites me the most about this news is that the Danish government now has a vested interest in preserving the integrity of and perhaps even improving the ODF format .
Vendors such as Microsoft will be less able to " get by " with substandard support for the format which , in turn , improves the experience of everyone using ODF .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The effect of this decision is that every official in the national government will have to publish official documents in ODF.
I don't think this decision has any directives about the formats that the government officials can receive.The obvious ripple effect of this decision is that everyone who consumes official documents will require software that can render an ODF document (and there are lots, so this will be easy).
Since most software that can render ODF documents can also create ODF documents, it seems likely that the ability to create ODF documents will become ubiquitous among those who interact with the government.It remains to be seen whether or not that will reduce the number of documents received by the government in non-ODF formats, but it certainly is possible since there must be some overlap between people who consume government documents and people who provide documents to the government.As an open standards supporter, what excites me the most about this news is that the Danish government now has a vested interest in preserving the integrity of and perhaps even improving the ODF format.
Vendors such as Microsoft will be less able to "get by" with substandard support for the format which, in turn, improves the experience of everyone using ODF.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950386</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950198</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>jgagnon</author>
	<datestamp>1264783980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not entirely true, since Microsoft Office can support ODF.  If their decision was about the benefits of an open file format then the choice of software to run should be irrelevant (meaning they could still run Microsoft Office everywhere instead of something like OpenOffice).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not entirely true , since Microsoft Office can support ODF .
If their decision was about the benefits of an open file format then the choice of software to run should be irrelevant ( meaning they could still run Microsoft Office everywhere instead of something like OpenOffice ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not entirely true, since Microsoft Office can support ODF.
If their decision was about the benefits of an open file format then the choice of software to run should be irrelevant (meaning they could still run Microsoft Office everywhere instead of something like OpenOffice).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30954564</id>
	<title>Re:Cost savings?</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1264758000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>What costs are saved by adopting this file format?</p></div><p>I think it's a fallacious argument from the start, anyway. Even if costs actually increase, ultimately, the openness of the file formats that government uses (at least in those cases where the documents can potentially be made available to the public, or where it's accepted formats of documents submitted to the government) is more important. Reason being, one can opt out from dealing with a private business that uses the "wrong format" for which you don't have means to work with it - but one cannot opt out from dealing with their government.</p><p>The cost saving issue is orthogonal to this, anyway, because deciding on the file format is not the same as deciding on the software (it's related, of course, because the latter can be affected by the former). They can still use MSOffice with ODF, after all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>What costs are saved by adopting this file format ? I think it 's a fallacious argument from the start , anyway .
Even if costs actually increase , ultimately , the openness of the file formats that government uses ( at least in those cases where the documents can potentially be made available to the public , or where it 's accepted formats of documents submitted to the government ) is more important .
Reason being , one can opt out from dealing with a private business that uses the " wrong format " for which you do n't have means to work with it - but one can not opt out from dealing with their government.The cost saving issue is orthogonal to this , anyway , because deciding on the file format is not the same as deciding on the software ( it 's related , of course , because the latter can be affected by the former ) .
They can still use MSOffice with ODF , after all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What costs are saved by adopting this file format?I think it's a fallacious argument from the start, anyway.
Even if costs actually increase, ultimately, the openness of the file formats that government uses (at least in those cases where the documents can potentially be made available to the public, or where it's accepted formats of documents submitted to the government) is more important.
Reason being, one can opt out from dealing with a private business that uses the "wrong format" for which you don't have means to work with it - but one cannot opt out from dealing with their government.The cost saving issue is orthogonal to this, anyway, because deciding on the file format is not the same as deciding on the software (it's related, of course, because the latter can be affected by the former).
They can still use MSOffice with ODF, after all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951252</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>RazorSharp</author>
	<datestamp>1264787820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First: software document formats are so far removed from the world of Adam Smith his arguments hardly apply</p><p>Second: even governments which are based on Smith's theories, such as the U.S., state in the constitution that the government is responsible for setting standards for weights and measurements so no one can try to patent things like inches or grams. In choosing what format the government uses for software documents they should follow the same method for choosing weight and measurement standards: choose something which is not patented. When the government is dependent of patented technologies, they become a slave to the patent owners.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First : software document formats are so far removed from the world of Adam Smith his arguments hardly applySecond : even governments which are based on Smith 's theories , such as the U.S. , state in the constitution that the government is responsible for setting standards for weights and measurements so no one can try to patent things like inches or grams .
In choosing what format the government uses for software documents they should follow the same method for choosing weight and measurement standards : choose something which is not patented .
When the government is dependent of patented technologies , they become a slave to the patent owners .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First: software document formats are so far removed from the world of Adam Smith his arguments hardly applySecond: even governments which are based on Smith's theories, such as the U.S., state in the constitution that the government is responsible for setting standards for weights and measurements so no one can try to patent things like inches or grams.
In choosing what format the government uses for software documents they should follow the same method for choosing weight and measurement standards: choose something which is not patented.
When the government is dependent of patented technologies, they become a slave to the patent owners.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950076</id>
	<title>learning to write</title>
	<author>sribe</author>
	<datestamp>1264783620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So regions and municipalities are in fact not government institutions in Denmark? My guess is that you meant that the decision is currently only effective for national government institutions, but I'm not sure.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So regions and municipalities are in fact not government institutions in Denmark ?
My guess is that you meant that the decision is currently only effective for national government institutions , but I 'm not sure .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So regions and municipalities are in fact not government institutions in Denmark?
My guess is that you meant that the decision is currently only effective for national government institutions, but I'm not sure.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949918</id>
	<title>another step in the right direction</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264782960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It makes me happy to see yet another government moving away from proprietary M$ software. I hope our government does the same and soon.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It makes me happy to see yet another government moving away from proprietary M $ software .
I hope our government does the same and soon .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It makes me happy to see yet another government moving away from proprietary M$ software.
I hope our government does the same and soon.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950464</id>
	<title>Re:Cost savings?</title>
	<author>jank1887</author>
	<datestamp>1264785000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>government offices will not be forced to upgrade to maintain compatibility. they will be able to apply cost-effectiveness decisions to their software purchases based on the benefit and value of future software versions.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>government offices will not be forced to upgrade to maintain compatibility .
they will be able to apply cost-effectiveness decisions to their software purchases based on the benefit and value of future software versions .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>government offices will not be forced to upgrade to maintain compatibility.
they will be able to apply cost-effectiveness decisions to their software purchases based on the benefit and value of future software versions.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950238</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952834</id>
	<title>Re:How/where was Denmark on the ISO debacle?</title>
	<author>Inf0phreak</author>
	<datestamp>1264793400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Denmark voted "Yes with comments" on the ISO OOXML ballot. Of course that turned out to do a hell of a lot of good since at later meetings a lot of ISO's changes to the ECMA spec were tossed away, so essentially we just voted "Yes".
</p><p>
A lot of the members of <a href="http://www.ds.dk/en-GB/Sider/default.aspx" title="www.ds.dk">Dansk Standard</a> [www.ds.dk] wanted to vote "No", but it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that Denmark would say yes given that business in this country is nearly 100\% MS-based. (Actually... Denmark might be the country in the West with the highest percentage of Windows installs).
</p><p>
And on a personal note, I don't take ISO seriously any more, and neither should you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Denmark voted " Yes with comments " on the ISO OOXML ballot .
Of course that turned out to do a hell of a lot of good since at later meetings a lot of ISO 's changes to the ECMA spec were tossed away , so essentially we just voted " Yes " .
A lot of the members of Dansk Standard [ www.ds.dk ] wanted to vote " No " , but it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that Denmark would say yes given that business in this country is nearly 100 \ % MS-based .
( Actually... Denmark might be the country in the West with the highest percentage of Windows installs ) .
And on a personal note , I do n't take ISO seriously any more , and neither should you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Denmark voted "Yes with comments" on the ISO OOXML ballot.
Of course that turned out to do a hell of a lot of good since at later meetings a lot of ISO's changes to the ECMA spec were tossed away, so essentially we just voted "Yes".
A lot of the members of Dansk Standard [www.ds.dk] wanted to vote "No", but it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that Denmark would say yes given that business in this country is nearly 100\% MS-based.
(Actually... Denmark might be the country in the West with the highest percentage of Windows installs).
And on a personal note, I don't take ISO seriously any more, and neither should you.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951150</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950606</id>
	<title>Re:learning to write</title>
	<author>Carewolf</author>
	<datestamp>1264785600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>So regions and municipalities are in fact not government institutions in Denmark?</p></div></blockquote><p>Are they anywhere? I thought many people was just misusing of the word "government" when they meant "public".</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So regions and municipalities are in fact not government institutions in Denmark ? Are they anywhere ?
I thought many people was just misusing of the word " government " when they meant " public " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So regions and municipalities are in fact not government institutions in Denmark?Are they anywhere?
I thought many people was just misusing of the word "government" when they meant "public".
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951406</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>unity100</author>
	<datestamp>1264788360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>those 'other people' will have to adopt a format to do business with the government.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>those 'other people ' will have to adopt a format to do business with the government .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>those 'other people' will have to adopt a format to do business with the government.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30960506</id>
	<title>Re:Untrue story - Denmark did not pick ODF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264843920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That would be "criterias" with the nice red-dotted underlining I suppose?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That would be " criterias " with the nice red-dotted underlining I suppose ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That would be "criterias" with the nice red-dotted underlining I suppose?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950352</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30954450</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1264757520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You're probably a MS shill but the simple fact is that there exists free plugins so that MS Office users can use ODF. One of them is made by Sun which currently is the only one with Enterprise support. Surprisingly the only company that does not make a plugin is MS itself.</p></div><p>Your information is outdated. Microsoft Office 2007 SP2 supports ODF 1.1, to the extent it is specified by the corresponding ISO standard, out of the box - no plugins needed.</p><p>That said, GP is still wrong, since, one way or another, ODF can now be used with any major office suite.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You 're probably a MS shill but the simple fact is that there exists free plugins so that MS Office users can use ODF .
One of them is made by Sun which currently is the only one with Enterprise support .
Surprisingly the only company that does not make a plugin is MS itself.Your information is outdated .
Microsoft Office 2007 SP2 supports ODF 1.1 , to the extent it is specified by the corresponding ISO standard , out of the box - no plugins needed.That said , GP is still wrong , since , one way or another , ODF can now be used with any major office suite .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You're probably a MS shill but the simple fact is that there exists free plugins so that MS Office users can use ODF.
One of them is made by Sun which currently is the only one with Enterprise support.
Surprisingly the only company that does not make a plugin is MS itself.Your information is outdated.
Microsoft Office 2007 SP2 supports ODF 1.1, to the extent it is specified by the corresponding ISO standard, out of the box - no plugins needed.That said, GP is still wrong, since, one way or another, ODF can now be used with any major office suite.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950412</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950944</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264786680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Woosh!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Woosh !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Woosh!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953822</id>
	<title>why is parent +5 insightful?</title>
	<author>hannson</author>
	<datestamp>1264798140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think you're interpreting the GP statement differently than I do because IIRC it's common for Microsoft to give better deals to those who seek alternatives to MS Office, and in many cases the organizations who say they're going with Open Standards (tm) end up with that sweet MS Office discount in the end. What the GP is pointing out is that he (and I) are hoping the Danish government is really routing for open standards but not using it just for leverage in price negotiations with Microsoft.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 're interpreting the GP statement differently than I do because IIRC it 's common for Microsoft to give better deals to those who seek alternatives to MS Office , and in many cases the organizations who say they 're going with Open Standards ( tm ) end up with that sweet MS Office discount in the end .
What the GP is pointing out is that he ( and I ) are hoping the Danish government is really routing for open standards but not using it just for leverage in price negotiations with Microsoft .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you're interpreting the GP statement differently than I do because IIRC it's common for Microsoft to give better deals to those who seek alternatives to MS Office, and in many cases the organizations who say they're going with Open Standards (tm) end up with that sweet MS Office discount in the end.
What the GP is pointing out is that he (and I) are hoping the Danish government is really routing for open standards but not using it just for leverage in price negotiations with Microsoft.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949970</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972</id>
	<title>ODF spreading like wildfire</title>
	<author>Palestrina</author>
	<datestamp>1264783200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>This is great news.  Open standards, like other forms of openness, spreads like wildfire.  In Europe we saw Belgium, Netherlands, Norway adopt ODF, now Denmark.  A similar pattern occurred in South America, with Brazil proving to be the center of influence.

So the question is: who is next?</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is great news .
Open standards , like other forms of openness , spreads like wildfire .
In Europe we saw Belgium , Netherlands , Norway adopt ODF , now Denmark .
A similar pattern occurred in South America , with Brazil proving to be the center of influence .
So the question is : who is next ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is great news.
Open standards, like other forms of openness, spreads like wildfire.
In Europe we saw Belgium, Netherlands, Norway adopt ODF, now Denmark.
A similar pattern occurred in South America, with Brazil proving to be the center of influence.
So the question is: who is next?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950060</id>
	<title>It's CUE, for fuck's sake</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264783560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I don't see this retarded grammatical error anywhere other than Slashdot.  You drooling morons complain about nigger trolls, but I say you deserve what you get.</p><p>Go fuck yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't see this retarded grammatical error anywhere other than Slashdot .
You drooling morons complain about nigger trolls , but I say you deserve what you get.Go fuck yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't see this retarded grammatical error anywhere other than Slashdot.
You drooling morons complain about nigger trolls, but I say you deserve what you get.Go fuck yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Kjella</author>
	<datestamp>1264785120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That was very creative, but I was under the impression that it is the invisible hand of the market that is supposed to select the best product, not the government. In so far that the government should be involved, it should do the least possible to alter the market from what it'd otherwise be. Even though "The more openly available, and widely adopted, and patent unencumbered the format is, the lower the barrier of entry to supporting it is, and the greater the amount of software that can support it will be." may be a positive market intervention, it is none the less a quite substantial intervention which libertarians are generally against. The concept that companies that get a too dominant position and have too much lock-in should be reigned in is more something I expect to find in a European socialist economy than coming from a libertarian.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was very creative , but I was under the impression that it is the invisible hand of the market that is supposed to select the best product , not the government .
In so far that the government should be involved , it should do the least possible to alter the market from what it 'd otherwise be .
Even though " The more openly available , and widely adopted , and patent unencumbered the format is , the lower the barrier of entry to supporting it is , and the greater the amount of software that can support it will be .
" may be a positive market intervention , it is none the less a quite substantial intervention which libertarians are generally against .
The concept that companies that get a too dominant position and have too much lock-in should be reigned in is more something I expect to find in a European socialist economy than coming from a libertarian .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was very creative, but I was under the impression that it is the invisible hand of the market that is supposed to select the best product, not the government.
In so far that the government should be involved, it should do the least possible to alter the market from what it'd otherwise be.
Even though "The more openly available, and widely adopted, and patent unencumbered the format is, the lower the barrier of entry to supporting it is, and the greater the amount of software that can support it will be.
" may be a positive market intervention, it is none the less a quite substantial intervention which libertarians are generally against.
The concept that companies that get a too dominant position and have too much lock-in should be reigned in is more something I expect to find in a European socialist economy than coming from a libertarian.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952080</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264790520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>so many retards in this thread<br>its not a fucking law! its a buyer (the danish government) picking a product (open standards)<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... capitalism at work, fuckfaces!!!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>so many retards in this threadits not a fucking law !
its a buyer ( the danish government ) picking a product ( open standards ) ... capitalism at work , fuckfaces ! !
!</tokentext>
<sentencetext>so many retards in this threadits not a fucking law!
its a buyer (the danish government) picking a product (open standards) ... capitalism at work, fuckfaces!!
!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951166</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>lurch\_mojoff</author>
	<datestamp>1264787520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>OK, let me break down fuzzyfuzzyfungus' argument into simple sentences for you, because you seem unable to wrap your mind around it.
<br> <br>
-- Government chooses a proprietary format<br>
  -- Everybody who is part of "the market" inevitably has to interact with the government and their documentation.<br>
  -- The software of the company owning said format, regardless of its merits, is the only one that can be used to comunicate with the government.<br>
  -- "The market" can go fuck itself selecting the best product. <br>
<br>
-- Government chooses an open, unencumbered with patents format<br>
  -- Everybody who is part of "the market" inevitably has to interact with the government and their documentation.<br>
  -- Anyone can write software that can be used to comunicate with the government.<br>
  -- "The market" can freely choose whichever products they fancy.<br>
<br>
And you seem to be absolutely right, only evil socialist governments and the pinko commies who've elected them seem to understand these two simple concepts. Hoorah for libertarianism.</htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , let me break down fuzzyfuzzyfungus ' argument into simple sentences for you , because you seem unable to wrap your mind around it .
-- Government chooses a proprietary format -- Everybody who is part of " the market " inevitably has to interact with the government and their documentation .
-- The software of the company owning said format , regardless of its merits , is the only one that can be used to comunicate with the government .
-- " The market " can go fuck itself selecting the best product .
-- Government chooses an open , unencumbered with patents format -- Everybody who is part of " the market " inevitably has to interact with the government and their documentation .
-- Anyone can write software that can be used to comunicate with the government .
-- " The market " can freely choose whichever products they fancy .
And you seem to be absolutely right , only evil socialist governments and the pinko commies who 've elected them seem to understand these two simple concepts .
Hoorah for libertarianism .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, let me break down fuzzyfuzzyfungus' argument into simple sentences for you, because you seem unable to wrap your mind around it.
-- Government chooses a proprietary format
  -- Everybody who is part of "the market" inevitably has to interact with the government and their documentation.
-- The software of the company owning said format, regardless of its merits, is the only one that can be used to comunicate with the government.
-- "The market" can go fuck itself selecting the best product.
-- Government chooses an open, unencumbered with patents format
  -- Everybody who is part of "the market" inevitably has to interact with the government and their documentation.
-- Anyone can write software that can be used to comunicate with the government.
-- "The market" can freely choose whichever products they fancy.
And you seem to be absolutely right, only evil socialist governments and the pinko commies who've elected them seem to understand these two simple concepts.
Hoorah for libertarianism.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949906</id>
	<title>Queue the Complimentary Office 2k7 Licenses in..</title>
	<author>oloron</author>
	<datestamp>1264782900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>4...3...2..
hopefully this is more than an attempt to glean free Office licenses from Microsoft, which they would undoubtedly cough up to prevent anyone else from gaining a foothold.

Good Luck Denmark, good to see this move, hope it was for the right reasons</htmltext>
<tokenext>4...3...2. . hopefully this is more than an attempt to glean free Office licenses from Microsoft , which they would undoubtedly cough up to prevent anyone else from gaining a foothold .
Good Luck Denmark , good to see this move , hope it was for the right reasons</tokentext>
<sentencetext>4...3...2..
hopefully this is more than an attempt to glean free Office licenses from Microsoft, which they would undoubtedly cough up to prevent anyone else from gaining a foothold.
Good Luck Denmark, good to see this move, hope it was for the right reasons</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950406</id>
	<title>Re:learning to write</title>
	<author>BitZtream</author>
	<datestamp>1264784820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Reading comprehension is hard.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Reading comprehension is hard .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Reading comprehension is hard.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950076</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952328</id>
	<title>Re:It's CUE, for fuck's sake</title>
	<author>Maxo-Texas</author>
	<datestamp>1264791480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Come now!  Don't LOOSE your cool and go all rouge on us!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Come now !
Do n't LOOSE your cool and go all rouge on us !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Come now!
Don't LOOSE your cool and go all rouge on us!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950060</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30965354</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264845120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Mmm... OK, try this:</p><p>1. Create ODF doc in OpenOffice, with table of contents, pics, tables etc.<br>2. Save<br>3. Now try and open it with MSWord 2007<br>4. Fail.</p><p>Nope, MS doesn't comply.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Mmm... OK , try this : 1 .
Create ODF doc in OpenOffice , with table of contents , pics , tables etc.2 .
Save3. Now try and open it with MSWord 20074 .
Fail.Nope , MS does n't comply .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Mmm... OK, try this:1.
Create ODF doc in OpenOffice, with table of contents, pics, tables etc.2.
Save3. Now try and open it with MSWord 20074.
Fail.Nope, MS doesn't comply.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950198</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952700</id>
	<title>Re:ODF spreading like wildfire</title>
	<author>jim\_v2000</author>
	<datestamp>1264792860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>&gt;Belgium, Netherlands, Norway...now Denmark
<br> <br>
Maybe it's more like slowfire.</htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; Belgium , Netherlands , Norway...now Denmark Maybe it 's more like slowfire .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt;Belgium, Netherlands, Norway...now Denmark
 
Maybe it's more like slowfire.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949970</id>
	<title>Sigh...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264783200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>
hopefully this is more than an attempt to glean free Office licenses from Microsoft</i></p></div> </blockquote><p>
Why hopefully? Do you even understand the point of ODF? It's *NOT* OpenOffice.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>hopefully this is more than an attempt to glean free Office licenses from Microsoft Why hopefully ?
Do you even understand the point of ODF ?
It 's * NOT * OpenOffice .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 
hopefully this is more than an attempt to glean free Office licenses from Microsoft 
Why hopefully?
Do you even understand the point of ODF?
It's *NOT* OpenOffice.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949906</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30956600</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>TageSabo</author>
	<datestamp>1264766100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Have you used Microsoft Office?  It can't interoperate with its own older versions,<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...</p></div><p>It can't even interoperate with newer versions. I teach math, and have Word 2008 for Mac OS. Students who hand in assignments edited in Word 2007 for Windows is unreadable, since math from Equation Editor is incompatible between versions.

Both versions of MS Office saves in the "standardized" docx format.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Have you used Microsoft Office ?
It ca n't interoperate with its own older versions , ...It ca n't even interoperate with newer versions .
I teach math , and have Word 2008 for Mac OS .
Students who hand in assignments edited in Word 2007 for Windows is unreadable , since math from Equation Editor is incompatible between versions .
Both versions of MS Office saves in the " standardized " docx format .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Have you used Microsoft Office?
It can't interoperate with its own older versions, ...It can't even interoperate with newer versions.
I teach math, and have Word 2008 for Mac OS.
Students who hand in assignments edited in Word 2007 for Windows is unreadable, since math from Equation Editor is incompatible between versions.
Both versions of MS Office saves in the "standardized" docx format.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950158</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950378</id>
	<title>It's a Little, Too Little, It's a Little Too Late!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264784760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Internet is often eternal. Once something appears on it, someone will invariably keep a copy of it--or the thing will simply stay online forever. Just as the rest of us are finally forgetting that video of the chubby kid prancing around the room with his light saber, someone will reintroduce it to a whole new generation of viewers. When - if - this kid turns 60, I guarantee that someone will pull out the video at his birthday party.</p><p>Parents and siblings do enough damage riding their own immediate family members about their missteps as a four-year-old. But in-family embarrassment has nothing on the Internet. Family faux pas is seldom self-inflicted--most of the Internet's embarrassing moments, however, are created by the targets themselves.</p><p>Tech-savvy parents--I include myself in that group--often lecture their kids about how every dumb thing they do on the Internet will never be forgotten. It's like a tattoo. As for tattoos, I've prevented my kids from getting those by reminding them that they're like buying a dumb sweater and wearing it for the rest of their lives. Posting dumb things on the Internet is worse. At least there's a painful process to remove the tattoo. The Internet has no such safe guard. If something actually does disappear, that's just luck. And there's also the Wayback Machine for looking at those old pages that have been cached forever.</p><p>There are seven deadly things kids should be leery of, when it comes to electronic tattooing.</p><p>1. Sexting. This means sending lewd SMSs or pics via cell phone. This is probably the dumbest thing you can do, and, according to studies, as much as 40 percent of teenagers do it. I can understand the sophomoric humor in the concept of "virtual flashing" to gross someone out or tease them, but you know that these flirtations are being saved by other giddy teens. Since most of these pics are technically kiddie porn, you don't see kids putting up Websites with these photos. But anyone playing this game is subject to child pornography laws and can be put on the various sex offender watch lists (which have been watered down by these sorts of dumb activities). Try to get a job in 10 years and see what happens. Get used to living at home for the rest of your life or pushing around a shopping cart.</p><p>2. Facebook and Myspace. Peeps are often far too open on Facebook. This includes posting too much personal information and revealing or embarrassing photos you think are funny. Facebook is a product you use after agreeing to its terms of service. It's a well known fact that the guy who runs the site is not interested in your privacy. Never assume that anything you post on the Internet is going to stay private. Nothing is. This is a giant, public network. Nowadays most employers, suitors, and would-be friends do their research through sites like Facebook. Try not to look like an irresponsible dummy.</p><p>3. Twitter. For twats !!  Did you know that various credit reporting agencies are now using Twitter to find out information about you? Sounding like an idiot on Twitter with hour-by-hour chatter about your feelings is incredibly revealing. Every so often I check in on someone's "tweets," only to discover that the person I just met is a total dingbat. Folks, these remarks never go away! Do yourself a favor and up the ante on your tweets. Try: "Wow. I just finished the last volume of Gibbon's Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire. Great history!" Rather than: "Yuck. I just squished a spider. I hate spiders. Eeeeeeew."</p><p>4. Blogging. Before Twitter and Facebook usurped much of the idle chatter, blogs were used for this purpose. Story after story emerged about how some dummy was fired from their job for blogging about their boss or co-worker in an unflattering manner. The weird part is that they were flabbergasted when it happened to them. I've never understood why someone wants to reveal their innermost feelings on a blog. It's generally not that entertaining. Too often it focuses on someone's cat. You have to wonder why people present such sad personaliti</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Internet is often eternal .
Once something appears on it , someone will invariably keep a copy of it--or the thing will simply stay online forever .
Just as the rest of us are finally forgetting that video of the chubby kid prancing around the room with his light saber , someone will reintroduce it to a whole new generation of viewers .
When - if - this kid turns 60 , I guarantee that someone will pull out the video at his birthday party.Parents and siblings do enough damage riding their own immediate family members about their missteps as a four-year-old .
But in-family embarrassment has nothing on the Internet .
Family faux pas is seldom self-inflicted--most of the Internet 's embarrassing moments , however , are created by the targets themselves.Tech-savvy parents--I include myself in that group--often lecture their kids about how every dumb thing they do on the Internet will never be forgotten .
It 's like a tattoo .
As for tattoos , I 've prevented my kids from getting those by reminding them that they 're like buying a dumb sweater and wearing it for the rest of their lives .
Posting dumb things on the Internet is worse .
At least there 's a painful process to remove the tattoo .
The Internet has no such safe guard .
If something actually does disappear , that 's just luck .
And there 's also the Wayback Machine for looking at those old pages that have been cached forever.There are seven deadly things kids should be leery of , when it comes to electronic tattooing.1 .
Sexting. This means sending lewd SMSs or pics via cell phone .
This is probably the dumbest thing you can do , and , according to studies , as much as 40 percent of teenagers do it .
I can understand the sophomoric humor in the concept of " virtual flashing " to gross someone out or tease them , but you know that these flirtations are being saved by other giddy teens .
Since most of these pics are technically kiddie porn , you do n't see kids putting up Websites with these photos .
But anyone playing this game is subject to child pornography laws and can be put on the various sex offender watch lists ( which have been watered down by these sorts of dumb activities ) .
Try to get a job in 10 years and see what happens .
Get used to living at home for the rest of your life or pushing around a shopping cart.2 .
Facebook and Myspace .
Peeps are often far too open on Facebook .
This includes posting too much personal information and revealing or embarrassing photos you think are funny .
Facebook is a product you use after agreeing to its terms of service .
It 's a well known fact that the guy who runs the site is not interested in your privacy .
Never assume that anything you post on the Internet is going to stay private .
Nothing is .
This is a giant , public network .
Nowadays most employers , suitors , and would-be friends do their research through sites like Facebook .
Try not to look like an irresponsible dummy.3 .
Twitter. For twats ! !
Did you know that various credit reporting agencies are now using Twitter to find out information about you ?
Sounding like an idiot on Twitter with hour-by-hour chatter about your feelings is incredibly revealing .
Every so often I check in on someone 's " tweets , " only to discover that the person I just met is a total dingbat .
Folks , these remarks never go away !
Do yourself a favor and up the ante on your tweets .
Try : " Wow .
I just finished the last volume of Gibbon 's Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire .
Great history !
" Rather than : " Yuck .
I just squished a spider .
I hate spiders .
Eeeeeeew. " 4. Blogging .
Before Twitter and Facebook usurped much of the idle chatter , blogs were used for this purpose .
Story after story emerged about how some dummy was fired from their job for blogging about their boss or co-worker in an unflattering manner .
The weird part is that they were flabbergasted when it happened to them .
I 've never understood why someone wants to reveal their innermost feelings on a blog .
It 's generally not that entertaining .
Too often it focuses on someone 's cat .
You have to wonder why people present such sad personaliti</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Internet is often eternal.
Once something appears on it, someone will invariably keep a copy of it--or the thing will simply stay online forever.
Just as the rest of us are finally forgetting that video of the chubby kid prancing around the room with his light saber, someone will reintroduce it to a whole new generation of viewers.
When - if - this kid turns 60, I guarantee that someone will pull out the video at his birthday party.Parents and siblings do enough damage riding their own immediate family members about their missteps as a four-year-old.
But in-family embarrassment has nothing on the Internet.
Family faux pas is seldom self-inflicted--most of the Internet's embarrassing moments, however, are created by the targets themselves.Tech-savvy parents--I include myself in that group--often lecture their kids about how every dumb thing they do on the Internet will never be forgotten.
It's like a tattoo.
As for tattoos, I've prevented my kids from getting those by reminding them that they're like buying a dumb sweater and wearing it for the rest of their lives.
Posting dumb things on the Internet is worse.
At least there's a painful process to remove the tattoo.
The Internet has no such safe guard.
If something actually does disappear, that's just luck.
And there's also the Wayback Machine for looking at those old pages that have been cached forever.There are seven deadly things kids should be leery of, when it comes to electronic tattooing.1.
Sexting. This means sending lewd SMSs or pics via cell phone.
This is probably the dumbest thing you can do, and, according to studies, as much as 40 percent of teenagers do it.
I can understand the sophomoric humor in the concept of "virtual flashing" to gross someone out or tease them, but you know that these flirtations are being saved by other giddy teens.
Since most of these pics are technically kiddie porn, you don't see kids putting up Websites with these photos.
But anyone playing this game is subject to child pornography laws and can be put on the various sex offender watch lists (which have been watered down by these sorts of dumb activities).
Try to get a job in 10 years and see what happens.
Get used to living at home for the rest of your life or pushing around a shopping cart.2.
Facebook and Myspace.
Peeps are often far too open on Facebook.
This includes posting too much personal information and revealing or embarrassing photos you think are funny.
Facebook is a product you use after agreeing to its terms of service.
It's a well known fact that the guy who runs the site is not interested in your privacy.
Never assume that anything you post on the Internet is going to stay private.
Nothing is.
This is a giant, public network.
Nowadays most employers, suitors, and would-be friends do their research through sites like Facebook.
Try not to look like an irresponsible dummy.3.
Twitter. For twats !!
Did you know that various credit reporting agencies are now using Twitter to find out information about you?
Sounding like an idiot on Twitter with hour-by-hour chatter about your feelings is incredibly revealing.
Every so often I check in on someone's "tweets," only to discover that the person I just met is a total dingbat.
Folks, these remarks never go away!
Do yourself a favor and up the ante on your tweets.
Try: "Wow.
I just finished the last volume of Gibbon's Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire.
Great history!
" Rather than: "Yuck.
I just squished a spider.
I hate spiders.
Eeeeeeew."4. Blogging.
Before Twitter and Facebook usurped much of the idle chatter, blogs were used for this purpose.
Story after story emerged about how some dummy was fired from their job for blogging about their boss or co-worker in an unflattering manner.
The weird part is that they were flabbergasted when it happened to them.
I've never understood why someone wants to reveal their innermost feelings on a blog.
It's generally not that entertaining.
Too often it focuses on someone's cat.
You have to wonder why people present such sad personaliti</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950670</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>debrain</author>
	<datestamp>1264785840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Sir &mdash;</p><p>Well said.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Sir    Well said .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sir —Well said.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950146</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30957574</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>ivucica</author>
	<datestamp>1264771320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I just received a few<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.docx files. I tried opening them in Office 2008 (mac, obviously). It failed, claiming corruption, then "recovered" the contents of these simple documents. All of them were "corrupted". Same archive contained one stray<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.doc file. Office 2008 opened it perfectly. If you want, I can mail you these files so you can open them on a mac yourself so it isn't anecdotal anymore.<br>
<br>
Q.E.D. While it may have "recovered" the contents, it still failed in opening it initially. If that doesn't scare you I don't know what will.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I just received a few .docx files .
I tried opening them in Office 2008 ( mac , obviously ) .
It failed , claiming corruption , then " recovered " the contents of these simple documents .
All of them were " corrupted " .
Same archive contained one stray .doc file .
Office 2008 opened it perfectly .
If you want , I can mail you these files so you can open them on a mac yourself so it is n't anecdotal anymore .
Q.E.D. While it may have " recovered " the contents , it still failed in opening it initially .
If that does n't scare you I do n't know what will .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I just received a few .docx files.
I tried opening them in Office 2008 (mac, obviously).
It failed, claiming corruption, then "recovered" the contents of these simple documents.
All of them were "corrupted".
Same archive contained one stray .doc file.
Office 2008 opened it perfectly.
If you want, I can mail you these files so you can open them on a mac yourself so it isn't anecdotal anymore.
Q.E.D. While it may have "recovered" the contents, it still failed in opening it initially.
If that doesn't scare you I don't know what will.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950724</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950218</id>
	<title>LOL, Nobel Peace Prize indeed!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264784100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1247049/Nobel-Peace-Prize-winner-Barack-Obama-ups-spending-nuclear-weapons-George-Bush.html" title="dailymail.co.uk" rel="nofollow">http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1247049/Nobel-Peace-Prize-winner-Barack-Obama-ups-spending-nuclear-weapons-George-Bush.html</a> [dailymail.co.uk]</p><p>Once again, the foreign media has no trouble at all pointing out the hypocrisy of President Breakfast Obanana!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1247049/Nobel-Peace-Prize-winner-Barack-Obama-ups-spending-nuclear-weapons-George-Bush.html [ dailymail.co.uk ] Once again , the foreign media has no trouble at all pointing out the hypocrisy of President Breakfast Obanana !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1247049/Nobel-Peace-Prize-winner-Barack-Obama-ups-spending-nuclear-weapons-George-Bush.html [dailymail.co.uk]Once again, the foreign media has no trouble at all pointing out the hypocrisy of President Breakfast Obanana!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949880</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950352</id>
	<title>Untrue story - Denmark did not pick ODF</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264784640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This slashdot story has the same headline as many Danish stories, but the decision did not exclude OOXML, and did not specifically pick ODF. However, the criterias that were decided upon, currently only fits ODF in the minds of most people, but Jasper Bojsen fra Microsoft also thinks that Microsoft OOXML complies with the criterias.</p><p>So basically, ODF is in, OOXML may be in, too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This slashdot story has the same headline as many Danish stories , but the decision did not exclude OOXML , and did not specifically pick ODF .
However , the criterias that were decided upon , currently only fits ODF in the minds of most people , but Jasper Bojsen fra Microsoft also thinks that Microsoft OOXML complies with the criterias.So basically , ODF is in , OOXML may be in , too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This slashdot story has the same headline as many Danish stories, but the decision did not exclude OOXML, and did not specifically pick ODF.
However, the criterias that were decided upon, currently only fits ODF in the minds of most people, but Jasper Bojsen fra Microsoft also thinks that Microsoft OOXML complies with the criterias.So basically, ODF is in, OOXML may be in, too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950158</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264783860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>dealt themselves a blow to their ability to interoperate with other people.</p></div><p>Incorrect.  ODF increases your ability to interoperate with other people.  Have you used Microsoft Office?  It can't interoperate with its own older versions, and the reasons for that are entirely aimed at getting users to <i>buy</i> the latest version, nothing more.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>dealt themselves a blow to their ability to interoperate with other people.Incorrect .
ODF increases your ability to interoperate with other people .
Have you used Microsoft Office ?
It ca n't interoperate with its own older versions , and the reasons for that are entirely aimed at getting users to buy the latest version , nothing more .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>dealt themselves a blow to their ability to interoperate with other people.Incorrect.
ODF increases your ability to interoperate with other people.
Have you used Microsoft Office?
It can't interoperate with its own older versions, and the reasons for that are entirely aimed at getting users to buy the latest version, nothing more.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952766</id>
	<title>Apple, please help.</title>
	<author>Drinian</author>
	<datestamp>1264793160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I wish Apple would make ODF more standard in its products (like in iPhone OS built in document viewers, etc.).  That would go a long way to seeing widespread adoption.  It's the 21st century for heaven's sake.  I can't believe we haven't adopted an open standard for our documents yet.  This is really becoming a pain.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I wish Apple would make ODF more standard in its products ( like in iPhone OS built in document viewers , etc. ) .
That would go a long way to seeing widespread adoption .
It 's the 21st century for heaven 's sake .
I ca n't believe we have n't adopted an open standard for our documents yet .
This is really becoming a pain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wish Apple would make ODF more standard in its products (like in iPhone OS built in document viewers, etc.).
That would go a long way to seeing widespread adoption.
It's the 21st century for heaven's sake.
I can't believe we haven't adopted an open standard for our documents yet.
This is really becoming a pain.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949880</id>
	<title>ODF format or not</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264782780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's still not in English, so I can not read it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's still not in English , so I can not read it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's still not in English, so I can not read it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950264</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Just Some Guy</author>
	<datestamp>1264784280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>As a free market libertarian, I think this move sucks, and anyone with half a brain should too.</p></div><p>As a free market Libertarian, I think you'd be well advised to learn why a group would choose an open standard that multiple vendors can compete for, rather than a closed (ISO can kiss my ass), single-vendor product.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a free market libertarian , I think this move sucks , and anyone with half a brain should too.As a free market Libertarian , I think you 'd be well advised to learn why a group would choose an open standard that multiple vendors can compete for , rather than a closed ( ISO can kiss my ass ) , single-vendor product .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a free market libertarian, I think this move sucks, and anyone with half a brain should too.As a free market Libertarian, I think you'd be well advised to learn why a group would choose an open standard that multiple vendors can compete for, rather than a closed (ISO can kiss my ass), single-vendor product.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951284</id>
	<title>Go Denmark!</title>
	<author>Arancaytar</author>
	<datestamp>1264787880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ODF is already on a roll throughout the European governments. It is the standard in Belgium, Croatia, the Netherlands, and has a strong foothold in Finland, France, Germany, the UK, Norway and Slovakia.</p><p>The real watershed moment will be when the central EU administration decides to standardize it. That might greatly encourage the other member nations to follow...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ODF is already on a roll throughout the European governments .
It is the standard in Belgium , Croatia , the Netherlands , and has a strong foothold in Finland , France , Germany , the UK , Norway and Slovakia.The real watershed moment will be when the central EU administration decides to standardize it .
That might greatly encourage the other member nations to follow.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ODF is already on a roll throughout the European governments.
It is the standard in Belgium, Croatia, the Netherlands, and has a strong foothold in Finland, France, Germany, the UK, Norway and Slovakia.The real watershed moment will be when the central EU administration decides to standardize it.
That might greatly encourage the other member nations to follow...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30966326</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>harmonise</author>
	<datestamp>1264853400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>As a free market libertarian, I think this move sucks, and anyone with half a brain should too.</p></div></blockquote><p>I agree.  However, those of us with a whole brain, rather than just half, realize that it's a good idea to have a open format that is supported by many vendors.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>As a free market libertarian , I think this move sucks , and anyone with half a brain should too.I agree .
However , those of us with a whole brain , rather than just half , realize that it 's a good idea to have a open format that is supported by many vendors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a free market libertarian, I think this move sucks, and anyone with half a brain should too.I agree.
However, those of us with a whole brain, rather than just half, realize that it's a good idea to have a open format that is supported by many vendors.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950182</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1264783920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As a free-market libertarian, you must know that Microsoft is the enemy of the free market, having got where it is today by subverting free markets.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As a free-market libertarian , you must know that Microsoft is the enemy of the free market , having got where it is today by subverting free markets .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As a free-market libertarian, you must know that Microsoft is the enemy of the free market, having got where it is today by subverting free markets.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950412</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong decision</title>
	<author>UnknowingFool</author>
	<datestamp>1264784820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>By taking this move, the Danish government has dealt themselves a blow to their ability to interoperate with other people.</p></div></blockquote><p>You're probably a MS shill but the simple fact is that there exists free plugins so that MS Office users can use ODF.  One of them is made by <a href="http://www.sun.com/software/star/odf\_plugin/" title="sun.com">Sun</a> [sun.com] which currently is the only one with Enterprise support.  Surprisingly the only company that does not make a plugin is MS itself.  So who's appears to be hindering interoperability here?
</p><blockquote><div><p>Going forward this means higher costs will be needed by both the government and every company that does business with them, meaning higher taxes and a reduced standard of living.</p></div></blockquote><p>I would like see the logic at which you arrived at this conclusion.  Open Office is free so there is no higher cost there.  ODF is an open format which means anyone can write applications that use it.  The list of existing applications that use it includes Google Docs, WordPerfect, Lotus Symphony, etc.  If anything, using MS Office incurs a higher cost because Danish citizens will be required to purchase it from MS to see Office proprietary formats.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>By taking this move , the Danish government has dealt themselves a blow to their ability to interoperate with other people.You 're probably a MS shill but the simple fact is that there exists free plugins so that MS Office users can use ODF .
One of them is made by Sun [ sun.com ] which currently is the only one with Enterprise support .
Surprisingly the only company that does not make a plugin is MS itself .
So who 's appears to be hindering interoperability here ?
Going forward this means higher costs will be needed by both the government and every company that does business with them , meaning higher taxes and a reduced standard of living.I would like see the logic at which you arrived at this conclusion .
Open Office is free so there is no higher cost there .
ODF is an open format which means anyone can write applications that use it .
The list of existing applications that use it includes Google Docs , WordPerfect , Lotus Symphony , etc .
If anything , using MS Office incurs a higher cost because Danish citizens will be required to purchase it from MS to see Office proprietary formats .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>By taking this move, the Danish government has dealt themselves a blow to their ability to interoperate with other people.You're probably a MS shill but the simple fact is that there exists free plugins so that MS Office users can use ODF.
One of them is made by Sun [sun.com] which currently is the only one with Enterprise support.
Surprisingly the only company that does not make a plugin is MS itself.
So who's appears to be hindering interoperability here?
Going forward this means higher costs will be needed by both the government and every company that does business with them, meaning higher taxes and a reduced standard of living.I would like see the logic at which you arrived at this conclusion.
Open Office is free so there is no higher cost there.
ODF is an open format which means anyone can write applications that use it.
The list of existing applications that use it includes Google Docs, WordPerfect, Lotus Symphony, etc.
If anything, using MS Office incurs a higher cost because Danish citizens will be required to purchase it from MS to see Office proprietary formats.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950182
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951252
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30954564
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951334
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949918
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952842
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950464
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953822
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949970
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950956
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30966326
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30957606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30957574
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950724
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950406
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950238
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951268
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951914
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950146
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950606
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950076
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951224
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952834
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951150
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30960506
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950352
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30965354
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950198
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950264
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30957522
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951284
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30956600
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950158
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949880
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952700
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30954450
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950412
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952080
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952328
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950060
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949906
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_01_29_1357203_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953384
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950386
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950076
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950606
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951150
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952834
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950238
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950514
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30954564
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950464
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950466
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950378
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950004
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950182
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952080
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950146
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950670
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950490
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951166
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950944
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951914
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952842
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950956
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951252
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950198
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30965354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951146
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950158
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950724
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30957574
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30956600
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950264
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30966326
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950412
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30957606
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30954450
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951406
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950352
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30960506
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950386
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951284
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30957522
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949880
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950218
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949906
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30950060
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952328
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949970
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953822
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949918
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951334
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_01_29_1357203.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30949972
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951268
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953354
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30952700
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30951224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_01_29_1357203.30953952
</commentlist>
</conversation>
