<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_08_2319248</id>
	<title>Study Says OOXML Unsuitable For Norwegian Government</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1265630220000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/" rel="nofollow">angry tapir</a> writes <i>"Microsoft's XML-based office document format, OOXML, <a href="http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/article/335505">does not meet the requirements for governmental use</a>, according to a new report published by the Norwegian Agency for Public Management and eGovernment (DIFI). The agency wants to start a debate over the report as part of its work on standards in the Norwegian government. (As we discussed a week ago, <a href="//news.slashdot.org/story/10/01/29/1357203/Denmark-Chooses-OpenDocument-Format">Denmark has already decided to choose ODF</a> over OOXML.)"</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>angry tapir writes " Microsoft 's XML-based office document format , OOXML , does not meet the requirements for governmental use , according to a new report published by the Norwegian Agency for Public Management and eGovernment ( DIFI ) .
The agency wants to start a debate over the report as part of its work on standards in the Norwegian government .
( As we discussed a week ago , Denmark has already decided to choose ODF over OOXML .
) "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>angry tapir writes "Microsoft's XML-based office document format, OOXML, does not meet the requirements for governmental use, according to a new report published by the Norwegian Agency for Public Management and eGovernment (DIFI).
The agency wants to start a debate over the report as part of its work on standards in the Norwegian government.
(As we discussed a week ago, Denmark has already decided to choose ODF over OOXML.
)"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068054</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265641920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Plus hopefully the Norwegian government has produced a document explaining their position, that will be quotable for reference.</p></div><p>But nobody else can read it because they all use Microsoft Office<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-P</p><p>(this is a joke)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Plus hopefully the Norwegian government has produced a document explaining their position , that will be quotable for reference.But nobody else can read it because they all use Microsoft Office : -P ( this is a joke )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plus hopefully the Norwegian government has produced a document explaining their position, that will be quotable for reference.But nobody else can read it because they all use Microsoft Office :-P(this is a joke)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31070944</id>
	<title>Credits Re:Don't forget, MS is not locked out</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265724840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>MS is just as free to implement the OpenDocument format as anyone else; and they have in fact implemented ODF support.[1]</p><p>[1] Microsoft resisted the inclusion of ODF import/export filters for some time, but finally decided to include them:<br><a href="http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20050930181153972" title="groklaw.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20050930181153972</a> [groklaw.net]<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument\_software" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument\_software</a> [wikipedia.org] </p><p>steveha</p></div><p>Credit where it's due. MS did not write the original MS Office ODF support. <a href="http://www.sun.com/software/star/odf\_plugin/" title="sun.com" rel="nofollow">Sun did.</a> [sun.com] And they open sourced their plugin for MS Office. What I'm curious about now, is: was microsoft dumb enough to re-write the ODF support when they did cave, or did that at least run with what they had? Re-writing would be my guess, just so they could claim ownership and also introduce bugs.. but I'm really curious. And <a href="http://www.robweir.com/blog/2009/05/update-on-odf-spreadsheet-interoperability.html" title="robweir.com" rel="nofollow">it would appear I guessed right.</a> [robweir.com]</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>MS is just as free to implement the OpenDocument format as anyone else ; and they have in fact implemented ODF support .
[ 1 ] [ 1 ] Microsoft resisted the inclusion of ODF import/export filters for some time , but finally decided to include them : http : //www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php ? story = 20050930181153972 [ groklaw.net ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument \ _software [ wikipedia.org ] stevehaCredit where it 's due .
MS did not write the original MS Office ODF support .
Sun did .
[ sun.com ] And they open sourced their plugin for MS Office .
What I 'm curious about now , is : was microsoft dumb enough to re-write the ODF support when they did cave , or did that at least run with what they had ?
Re-writing would be my guess , just so they could claim ownership and also introduce bugs.. but I 'm really curious .
And it would appear I guessed right .
[ robweir.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS is just as free to implement the OpenDocument format as anyone else; and they have in fact implemented ODF support.
[1][1] Microsoft resisted the inclusion of ODF import/export filters for some time, but finally decided to include them:http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20050930181153972 [groklaw.net]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument\_software [wikipedia.org] stevehaCredit where it's due.
MS did not write the original MS Office ODF support.
Sun did.
[sun.com] And they open sourced their plugin for MS Office.
What I'm curious about now, is: was microsoft dumb enough to re-write the ODF support when they did cave, or did that at least run with what they had?
Re-writing would be my guess, just so they could claim ownership and also introduce bugs.. but I'm really curious.
And it would appear I guessed right.
[robweir.com]
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068070</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069028</id>
	<title>I know this is Slashdot, but...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265653260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does anyone have a link to the darned report itself?</p><p>Preferably, in English?</p><p>Thanks in advance if someone can help out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does anyone have a link to the darned report itself ? Preferably , in English ? Thanks in advance if someone can help out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does anyone have a link to the darned report itself?Preferably, in English?Thanks in advance if someone can help out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067430</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265635260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>When trying to debunk an obvious lie (such as "OOXML is a standard"), one reasonably visible dis-believer might be enough. All governments and organizations believing, or pretending to believe, that OOXML is a standard now know they're fools, and/or not fooling anyone.</p><p>Plus hopefully the Norwegian government has produced a document explaining their position, that will be quotable for reference.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>When trying to debunk an obvious lie ( such as " OOXML is a standard " ) , one reasonably visible dis-believer might be enough .
All governments and organizations believing , or pretending to believe , that OOXML is a standard now know they 're fools , and/or not fooling anyone.Plus hopefully the Norwegian government has produced a document explaining their position , that will be quotable for reference .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When trying to debunk an obvious lie (such as "OOXML is a standard"), one reasonably visible dis-believer might be enough.
All governments and organizations believing, or pretending to believe, that OOXML is a standard now know they're fools, and/or not fooling anyone.Plus hopefully the Norwegian government has produced a document explaining their position, that will be quotable for reference.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31070512</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>Scrameustache</author>
	<datestamp>1265720400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Then how the hell did they get an ISO certification?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:S</p><p>Oh, crap, ISO is in the pocket of major industry players?<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Then how the hell did they get an ISO certification ?
: SOh , crap , ISO is in the pocket of major industry players ?
: (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Then how the hell did they get an ISO certification?
:SOh, crap, ISO is in the pocket of major industry players?
:(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068862</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067292</id>
	<title>has a larger backstory</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265634360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The OOXML-standardization backstory is pretty convoluted, so I'm not sure I can give an accurate summary, but as far as I can tell this is basically another round in the ongoing fight that seems to have, for some reason, been more active in Norway than elsewhere. The article mentions that the main author of this report was involved in the controversy at the ISO, and there was also a related <a href="http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/10/04/0128245" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">controversy</a> [slashdot.org] in one of Norway's national standards bodies.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The OOXML-standardization backstory is pretty convoluted , so I 'm not sure I can give an accurate summary , but as far as I can tell this is basically another round in the ongoing fight that seems to have , for some reason , been more active in Norway than elsewhere .
The article mentions that the main author of this report was involved in the controversy at the ISO , and there was also a related controversy [ slashdot.org ] in one of Norway 's national standards bodies .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The OOXML-standardization backstory is pretty convoluted, so I'm not sure I can give an accurate summary, but as far as I can tell this is basically another round in the ongoing fight that seems to have, for some reason, been more active in Norway than elsewhere.
The article mentions that the main author of this report was involved in the controversy at the ISO, and there was also a related controversy [slashdot.org] in one of Norway's national standards bodies.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069480</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265747760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Plus hopefully the Norwegian government has produced a document explaining their position, that will be quotable for reference.</p></div><p>Newsflash from Oslo. In a press conference today, the Norwegian Gov't said, "Bjork Bjork Bjork."</p><p>And that's *after* translation.</p><p>Original text: "Bjork Bjork Bjork."</p><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr>/sorry</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Plus hopefully the Norwegian government has produced a document explaining their position , that will be quotable for reference.Newsflash from Oslo .
In a press conference today , the Norwegian Gov't said , " Bjork Bjork Bjork .
" And that 's * after * translation.Original text : " Bjork Bjork Bjork .
" /sorry</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Plus hopefully the Norwegian government has produced a document explaining their position, that will be quotable for reference.Newsflash from Oslo.
In a press conference today, the Norwegian Gov't said, "Bjork Bjork Bjork.
"And that's *after* translation.Original text: "Bjork Bjork Bjork.
" /sorry
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069648</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>JohnBailey</author>
	<datestamp>1265706780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>And the Norweigan government matters, why? They're probably a drop in the bucket for Microsoft's revenue.</p></div><p>Then why do Microsoft pursue any dissent in their corporate customers so strongly? And no.. I'm not going to cite examples. We have all heard of the crack sales teams descending on companies and governments who dare to leave the MS embrace, armed with the authority to practically give the MS products away rather than lose an influential customer.

You are absolutely correct. A government switching away from Office is trivial. But only if you are counting licenses. If you count influence, then MS are in for a decidedly nasty future.
And another government rejecting MS file formats is a bad thing for MS. Even a city local government is enough to make MS bring in the heavy negotiators. If the file format goes from essential to optional, then so does Office.

Right.. Said my piece. Astroturf away.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>And the Norweigan government matters , why ?
They 're probably a drop in the bucket for Microsoft 's revenue.Then why do Microsoft pursue any dissent in their corporate customers so strongly ?
And no.. I 'm not going to cite examples .
We have all heard of the crack sales teams descending on companies and governments who dare to leave the MS embrace , armed with the authority to practically give the MS products away rather than lose an influential customer .
You are absolutely correct .
A government switching away from Office is trivial .
But only if you are counting licenses .
If you count influence , then MS are in for a decidedly nasty future .
And another government rejecting MS file formats is a bad thing for MS. Even a city local government is enough to make MS bring in the heavy negotiators .
If the file format goes from essential to optional , then so does Office .
Right.. Said my piece .
Astroturf away .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the Norweigan government matters, why?
They're probably a drop in the bucket for Microsoft's revenue.Then why do Microsoft pursue any dissent in their corporate customers so strongly?
And no.. I'm not going to cite examples.
We have all heard of the crack sales teams descending on companies and governments who dare to leave the MS embrace, armed with the authority to practically give the MS products away rather than lose an influential customer.
You are absolutely correct.
A government switching away from Office is trivial.
But only if you are counting licenses.
If you count influence, then MS are in for a decidedly nasty future.
And another government rejecting MS file formats is a bad thing for MS. Even a city local government is enough to make MS bring in the heavy negotiators.
If the file format goes from essential to optional, then so does Office.
Right.. Said my piece.
Astroturf away.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068220</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265644200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The people using the software are the diverse systems in his example.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The people using the software are the diverse systems in his example .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The people using the software are the diverse systems in his example.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067952</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265640660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>When trying to debunk an obvious lie (such as "OOXML is a standard")</p></div><p>The first thing to do is to look up the definition of the word.</p><p>For instance, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard" title="wikipedia.org">A technical standard is an established norm or requirement.</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>Then you look up the facts relevant to the question. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office\_Open\_XML" title="wikipedia.org">Office Open XML (also referred to as OOXML or Open XML) is <b>an ISO/IEC standardized</b> ZIP-compatible file format originally developed by Microsoft.</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>Now, I know your confusion stems from the many uses of the word "standard" (OOXML is clearly not a type of flag), but you're the one that sound like a fool when you say it's a lie that OOXML is a standard.</p><p>P.S. I hate Microsoft, I also hate disinformation. This is a fight between standards, don't pretend otherwise.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>When trying to debunk an obvious lie ( such as " OOXML is a standard " ) The first thing to do is to look up the definition of the word.For instance , A technical standard is an established norm or requirement .
[ wikipedia.org ] Then you look up the facts relevant to the question .
Office Open XML ( also referred to as OOXML or Open XML ) is an ISO/IEC standardized ZIP-compatible file format originally developed by Microsoft .
[ wikipedia.org ] Now , I know your confusion stems from the many uses of the word " standard " ( OOXML is clearly not a type of flag ) , but you 're the one that sound like a fool when you say it 's a lie that OOXML is a standard.P.S .
I hate Microsoft , I also hate disinformation .
This is a fight between standards , do n't pretend otherwise .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>When trying to debunk an obvious lie (such as "OOXML is a standard")The first thing to do is to look up the definition of the word.For instance, A technical standard is an established norm or requirement.
[wikipedia.org]Then you look up the facts relevant to the question.
Office Open XML (also referred to as OOXML or Open XML) is an ISO/IEC standardized ZIP-compatible file format originally developed by Microsoft.
[wikipedia.org]Now, I know your confusion stems from the many uses of the word "standard" (OOXML is clearly not a type of flag), but you're the one that sound like a fool when you say it's a lie that OOXML is a standard.P.S.
I hate Microsoft, I also hate disinformation.
This is a fight between standards, don't pretend otherwise.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067430</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067870</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>willabr</author>
	<datestamp>1265639760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Norway, hm..... How about Open Object Foundation Document Architecture (OOFDA)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Norway , hm..... How about Open Object Foundation Document Architecture ( OOFDA )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Norway, hm..... How about Open Object Foundation Document Architecture (OOFDA)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068660</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>mahadiga</author>
	<datestamp>1265649060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think Interoperability without Open source is Oxymoron.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think Interoperability without Open source is Oxymoron .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think Interoperability without Open source is Oxymoron.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067514</id>
	<title>Re:Such a nicely chosen name for the standard...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265635980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not only that, but it combines "OO" and "XML", two of the most powerful buzzwords the computing industry has ever seen.</p><p>I'm not trying to be funny, either. You wouldn't believe the number of managers I've had to deal with who see those terms, and go apeshit crazy about how good something is. Tell them your technology is "object-oriented", and they're sold. Then tell them it involves "XML", and they absolutely can't resist it.</p><p>Mind you, these people tend to not know a thing about the technical aspects of software development. They don't know any programming languages, but are convinced that "object-oriented" is the ONLY way. They haven't got a clue what an XML document even looks like, but insist that it can do anything.</p><p>The only thing managers these days slurp up more than "OO" and "XML" are "Web Services". If Microsoft had named it OOXMLWebServices instead of just OOXML, ODF would've been destroyed years ago.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not only that , but it combines " OO " and " XML " , two of the most powerful buzzwords the computing industry has ever seen.I 'm not trying to be funny , either .
You would n't believe the number of managers I 've had to deal with who see those terms , and go apeshit crazy about how good something is .
Tell them your technology is " object-oriented " , and they 're sold .
Then tell them it involves " XML " , and they absolutely ca n't resist it.Mind you , these people tend to not know a thing about the technical aspects of software development .
They do n't know any programming languages , but are convinced that " object-oriented " is the ONLY way .
They have n't got a clue what an XML document even looks like , but insist that it can do anything.The only thing managers these days slurp up more than " OO " and " XML " are " Web Services " .
If Microsoft had named it OOXMLWebServices instead of just OOXML , ODF would 've been destroyed years ago .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not only that, but it combines "OO" and "XML", two of the most powerful buzzwords the computing industry has ever seen.I'm not trying to be funny, either.
You wouldn't believe the number of managers I've had to deal with who see those terms, and go apeshit crazy about how good something is.
Tell them your technology is "object-oriented", and they're sold.
Then tell them it involves "XML", and they absolutely can't resist it.Mind you, these people tend to not know a thing about the technical aspects of software development.
They don't know any programming languages, but are convinced that "object-oriented" is the ONLY way.
They haven't got a clue what an XML document even looks like, but insist that it can do anything.The only thing managers these days slurp up more than "OO" and "XML" are "Web Services".
If Microsoft had named it OOXMLWebServices instead of just OOXML, ODF would've been destroyed years ago.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069926</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>gbjbaanb</author>
	<datestamp>1265711940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Read both specs</i></p><p>As the OOXML 'spec' is over 6000 pages, I don't think anyone has. Definitely not the ISO standards body for sure<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Read both specsAs the OOXML 'spec ' is over 6000 pages , I do n't think anyone has .
Definitely not the ISO standards body for sure : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Read both specsAs the OOXML 'spec' is over 6000 pages, I don't think anyone has.
Definitely not the ISO standards body for sure :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067820</id>
	<title>It isn't OOXML..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265639340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>It isn't OOXML, it is <b>MOOXML</b>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It is n't OOXML , it is MOOXML .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It isn't OOXML, it is MOOXML.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067658</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265637480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It means something to those who care less about Microsoft's failure than they do about free formats' success.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It means something to those who care less about Microsoft 's failure than they do about free formats ' success .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It means something to those who care less about Microsoft's failure than they do about free formats' success.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067534</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>euxneks</author>
	<datestamp>1265636220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>This has got to be one of the most geeky and wonderful posts I have read on Slashdot in a long long time.</htmltext>
<tokenext>This has got to be one of the most geeky and wonderful posts I have read on Slashdot in a long long time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This has got to be one of the most geeky and wonderful posts I have read on Slashdot in a long long time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069628</id>
	<title>Re:Fredonia</title>
	<author>cerberusss</author>
	<datestamp>1265706540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The government of Fredonia chooses<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.txt, ASCII, with \n line endings.</p></div><p>Unfortunately, US-ASCII does not contain all characters that Fredonians use.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The government of Fredonia chooses .txt , ASCII , with \ n line endings.Unfortunately , US-ASCII does not contain all characters that Fredonians use .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The government of Fredonia chooses .txt, ASCII, with \n line endings.Unfortunately, US-ASCII does not contain all characters that Fredonians use.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067622</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>Stumbles</author>
	<datestamp>1265637120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>To summarize; Microsoft sabotaged the standards body with their own people to solidify OOXML as t h e standard. Despite their boldness in daylight to buy a standards body, the irony is; of all groups of people, governments are recognizing Microsoft to be nothing more than a Mobster/racketeer in shrink wrap.</htmltext>
<tokenext>To summarize ; Microsoft sabotaged the standards body with their own people to solidify OOXML as t h e standard .
Despite their boldness in daylight to buy a standards body , the irony is ; of all groups of people , governments are recognizing Microsoft to be nothing more than a Mobster/racketeer in shrink wrap .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To summarize; Microsoft sabotaged the standards body with their own people to solidify OOXML as t h e standard.
Despite their boldness in daylight to buy a standards body, the irony is; of all groups of people, governments are recognizing Microsoft to be nothing more than a Mobster/racketeer in shrink wrap.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068336</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>rtb61</author>
	<datestamp>1265645340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> To cut a long story short <a href="http://news.cnet.com/Office-2007-fails-OOXML-conformance-test/2100-7344\_3-6237855.html" title="cnet.com">http://news.cnet.com/Office-2007-fails-OOXML-conformance-test/2100-7344\_3-6237855.html</a> [cnet.com], M$ Office fails it's own standards test, so as regards the monopoly office application the standard is obviously not standard to anything, even within it's own purpose designed program suite. I suppose for that you have to buy the next upgrade or even perhaps the one after that etc. etc.. </p><p> For M$ to adhere to ODF is simply a choice, for others to adhere to OOXML represents high risk of patent infringement, licence fees, of the standard saying one thing whilst their program does another, ensuring all competitors will never end up being totally compatible and remain a bit buggy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To cut a long story short http : //news.cnet.com/Office-2007-fails-OOXML-conformance-test/2100-7344 \ _3-6237855.html [ cnet.com ] , M $ Office fails it 's own standards test , so as regards the monopoly office application the standard is obviously not standard to anything , even within it 's own purpose designed program suite .
I suppose for that you have to buy the next upgrade or even perhaps the one after that etc .
etc.. For M $ to adhere to ODF is simply a choice , for others to adhere to OOXML represents high risk of patent infringement , licence fees , of the standard saying one thing whilst their program does another , ensuring all competitors will never end up being totally compatible and remain a bit buggy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> To cut a long story short http://news.cnet.com/Office-2007-fails-OOXML-conformance-test/2100-7344\_3-6237855.html [cnet.com], M$ Office fails it's own standards test, so as regards the monopoly office application the standard is obviously not standard to anything, even within it's own purpose designed program suite.
I suppose for that you have to buy the next upgrade or even perhaps the one after that etc.
etc..  For M$ to adhere to ODF is simply a choice, for others to adhere to OOXML represents high risk of patent infringement, licence fees, of the standard saying one thing whilst their program does another, ensuring all competitors will never end up being totally compatible and remain a bit buggy.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067500</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265635860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For Norwegians, quite a lot I guess. As for giving Microsofts revenue, I'd say still to big but improvAs aing.</p><p>And of course having an investmentfond able to buy Microsoft, twice, gives the Norweigan government a possition not to be affected by potential MS strong arm tacticks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For Norwegians , quite a lot I guess .
As for giving Microsofts revenue , I 'd say still to big but improvAs aing.And of course having an investmentfond able to buy Microsoft , twice , gives the Norweigan government a possition not to be affected by potential MS strong arm tacticks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For Norwegians, quite a lot I guess.
As for giving Microsofts revenue, I'd say still to big but improvAs aing.And of course having an investmentfond able to buy Microsoft, twice, gives the Norweigan government a possition not to be affected by potential MS strong arm tacticks.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067916</id>
	<title>Re:has a larger backstory</title>
	<author>Nefarious Wheel</author>
	<datestamp>1265640240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Government and industrial institutions, once they reach a certain size, are notoriously risk-adverse.  If there's a change in the weather, they'd prefer someone else to be the weathervane.  Things that happen in Norway can have a disproportionate amount of influence across the world.  <p>It's not a phenomenon limited to the office software industry, either; in the electricity distribution industry, for example, many very large organisations are watching what's happening in Portugal and Spain and have stated they want to incorporate that experience before they launch their own programmes of change.  </p><p>Why?  Simply because they're doing it first.  I guess it's because they're smaller and a bit more agile, I don't know. But it's much cheaper to watch someone else make mistakes and follow blind alleys rather than take the risk on yourself.  Risk is expensive.  </p><p>So, the electricity world watches Iberia.  The bureaucracies of the world will be watching Norway, make no mistake.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Government and industrial institutions , once they reach a certain size , are notoriously risk-adverse .
If there 's a change in the weather , they 'd prefer someone else to be the weathervane .
Things that happen in Norway can have a disproportionate amount of influence across the world .
It 's not a phenomenon limited to the office software industry , either ; in the electricity distribution industry , for example , many very large organisations are watching what 's happening in Portugal and Spain and have stated they want to incorporate that experience before they launch their own programmes of change .
Why ? Simply because they 're doing it first .
I guess it 's because they 're smaller and a bit more agile , I do n't know .
But it 's much cheaper to watch someone else make mistakes and follow blind alleys rather than take the risk on yourself .
Risk is expensive .
So , the electricity world watches Iberia .
The bureaucracies of the world will be watching Norway , make no mistake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Government and industrial institutions, once they reach a certain size, are notoriously risk-adverse.
If there's a change in the weather, they'd prefer someone else to be the weathervane.
Things that happen in Norway can have a disproportionate amount of influence across the world.
It's not a phenomenon limited to the office software industry, either; in the electricity distribution industry, for example, many very large organisations are watching what's happening in Portugal and Spain and have stated they want to incorporate that experience before they launch their own programmes of change.
Why?  Simply because they're doing it first.
I guess it's because they're smaller and a bit more agile, I don't know.
But it's much cheaper to watch someone else make mistakes and follow blind alleys rather than take the risk on yourself.
Risk is expensive.
So, the electricity world watches Iberia.
The bureaucracies of the world will be watching Norway, make no mistake.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067292</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067966</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>Arker</author>
	<datestamp>1265640840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Microsoft's OOXML, while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most users due to the pervasity of Microsoft Office</p></div></blockquote><p>Actually that is not correct. Most Microsoft Office implementations found "in the wild" are *less* interoperable with the new MS Office than with Open Office. </p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft 's OOXML , while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most users due to the pervasity of Microsoft OfficeActually that is not correct .
Most Microsoft Office implementations found " in the wild " are * less * interoperable with the new MS Office than with Open Office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft's OOXML, while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most users due to the pervasity of Microsoft OfficeActually that is not correct.
Most Microsoft Office implementations found "in the wild" are *less* interoperable with the new MS Office than with Open Office. 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069732</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>lxs</author>
	<datestamp>1265708520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domino\_effect" title="wikipedia.org">The Domino Effect</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Domino Effect [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Domino Effect [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31070168</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>daem0n1x</author>
	<datestamp>1265716080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The most advanced country in the world is a trend setter for the rest. Bangladesh has tens of times the population of Norway, but I bet Microsoft doesn't care a lot about it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The most advanced country in the world is a trend setter for the rest .
Bangladesh has tens of times the population of Norway , but I bet Microsoft does n't care a lot about it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The most advanced country in the world is a trend setter for the rest.
Bangladesh has tens of times the population of Norway, but I bet Microsoft doesn't care a lot about it.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067360</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>fuzzyfuzzyfungus</author>
	<datestamp>1265634840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>Because software costs money to make; but virtually no money to reproduce.<br> <br>

The Norwegian government likely spends somewhere between some hundreds of thousands and some millions on software that must interpret their chosen document format(ie. actual copies of an office suite, server-side components that generate documents in response to web input, data archive widgetry that needs to be able to read inside the files it stores, etc.) Those who must exchange documents with the Norwegian government presumably spend some millions more.<br> <br>

If that money is being spent on ODF-supporting software, the cost of ODF-supporting software goes down for everybody(or, more precisely, if they chose to build on OSS foundations, the cost for everybody stays the same, and the amount and quality available rises. If they end up going with something commercial, that commercial offering now has more customers across the same roughly fixed cost of development).<br> <br>

It isn't so much that Norway is a vital source of Microsoft revenue, as they likely aren't. It's that their future software demand is going to subsidize improvements to Microsoft's competitors, rather than being high-margin purchases of licences to code that Microsoft has already developed.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Because software costs money to make ; but virtually no money to reproduce .
The Norwegian government likely spends somewhere between some hundreds of thousands and some millions on software that must interpret their chosen document format ( ie .
actual copies of an office suite , server-side components that generate documents in response to web input , data archive widgetry that needs to be able to read inside the files it stores , etc .
) Those who must exchange documents with the Norwegian government presumably spend some millions more .
If that money is being spent on ODF-supporting software , the cost of ODF-supporting software goes down for everybody ( or , more precisely , if they chose to build on OSS foundations , the cost for everybody stays the same , and the amount and quality available rises .
If they end up going with something commercial , that commercial offering now has more customers across the same roughly fixed cost of development ) .
It is n't so much that Norway is a vital source of Microsoft revenue , as they likely are n't .
It 's that their future software demand is going to subsidize improvements to Microsoft 's competitors , rather than being high-margin purchases of licences to code that Microsoft has already developed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because software costs money to make; but virtually no money to reproduce.
The Norwegian government likely spends somewhere between some hundreds of thousands and some millions on software that must interpret their chosen document format(ie.
actual copies of an office suite, server-side components that generate documents in response to web input, data archive widgetry that needs to be able to read inside the files it stores, etc.
) Those who must exchange documents with the Norwegian government presumably spend some millions more.
If that money is being spent on ODF-supporting software, the cost of ODF-supporting software goes down for everybody(or, more precisely, if they chose to build on OSS foundations, the cost for everybody stays the same, and the amount and quality available rises.
If they end up going with something commercial, that commercial offering now has more customers across the same roughly fixed cost of development).
It isn't so much that Norway is a vital source of Microsoft revenue, as they likely aren't.
It's that their future software demand is going to subsidize improvements to Microsoft's competitors, rather than being high-margin purchases of licences to code that Microsoft has already developed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300</id>
	<title>What's in a name</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265634420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>DIFI's[1] report was written by Hypatia, a Norwegian consultancy specializing in standardization and software accessibility.</p></div> </blockquote><p>Strange, that the name of the consultancy is Hypatia.  She, after all, was a mathematician-philosopher who ascribed to Plotinus's ideal... that empirical research is inherently flawed, and only logic and mathematics can achieve truth.<br> <br>I mean, there's a clear relationship here that I find very amusing.  Microsoft's OOXML, while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most users due to the pervasity of Microsoft Office, is not logically more interoperable due to the nature of what MS has done to the "open" standard.<br> <br>Delicious allegory.<br> <br>[1] DIFI is the Norwegian Agency responsible for the decision.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>DIFI 's [ 1 ] report was written by Hypatia , a Norwegian consultancy specializing in standardization and software accessibility .
Strange , that the name of the consultancy is Hypatia .
She , after all , was a mathematician-philosopher who ascribed to Plotinus 's ideal... that empirical research is inherently flawed , and only logic and mathematics can achieve truth .
I mean , there 's a clear relationship here that I find very amusing .
Microsoft 's OOXML , while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most users due to the pervasity of Microsoft Office , is not logically more interoperable due to the nature of what MS has done to the " open " standard .
Delicious allegory .
[ 1 ] DIFI is the Norwegian Agency responsible for the decision .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>DIFI's[1] report was written by Hypatia, a Norwegian consultancy specializing in standardization and software accessibility.
Strange, that the name of the consultancy is Hypatia.
She, after all, was a mathematician-philosopher who ascribed to Plotinus's ideal... that empirical research is inherently flawed, and only logic and mathematics can achieve truth.
I mean, there's a clear relationship here that I find very amusing.
Microsoft's OOXML, while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most users due to the pervasity of Microsoft Office, is not logically more interoperable due to the nature of what MS has done to the "open" standard.
Delicious allegory.
[1] DIFI is the Norwegian Agency responsible for the decision.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068918</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>MightyMartian</author>
	<datestamp>1265651820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Oh look, the Microsoft shill has come along to lie.  Shocking, I tell you, shocking!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh look , the Microsoft shill has come along to lie .
Shocking , I tell you , shocking !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh look, the Microsoft shill has come along to lie.
Shocking, I tell you, shocking!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067886</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>martin-boundary</author>
	<datestamp>1265635620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>  Microsoft's OOXML, while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most
  users due to the pervasity of Microsoft Office,</p></div>
</blockquote><p>
Doesn't <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interoperability" title="wikipedia.org">interoperability</a> [wikipedia.org] mean ability to work with diverse systems?
</p><p>
If users of MS Office share
documents, that's not interoperability since they all use the same software family. You have to look at users who transfer documents back and forth between
diverse software systems, eg MS Office, Open Office, Lotus Symphony, AppleWorks, etc.
</p><p>
Interoperability is about making faithful conversions easy.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft 's OOXML , while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most users due to the pervasity of Microsoft Office , Does n't interoperability [ wikipedia.org ] mean ability to work with diverse systems ?
If users of MS Office share documents , that 's not interoperability since they all use the same software family .
You have to look at users who transfer documents back and forth between diverse software systems , eg MS Office , Open Office , Lotus Symphony , AppleWorks , etc .
Interoperability is about making faithful conversions easy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>  Microsoft's OOXML, while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most
  users due to the pervasity of Microsoft Office,

Doesn't interoperability [wikipedia.org] mean ability to work with diverse systems?
If users of MS Office share
documents, that's not interoperability since they all use the same software family.
You have to look at users who transfer documents back and forth between
diverse software systems, eg MS Office, Open Office, Lotus Symphony, AppleWorks, etc.
Interoperability is about making faithful conversions easy.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069234</id>
	<title>Re:Such a nicely chosen name for the standard...</title>
	<author>linebackn</author>
	<datestamp>1265656320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Calling it "OOXML" certainly can be confusing since it is easy to not know or remember what the "OO" stands for. But on top of that, the average person knows this format only as the "Microsoft Office 2007" format.</p><p>And rightfully, the "Microsoft Office 2007" format is all it is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Calling it " OOXML " certainly can be confusing since it is easy to not know or remember what the " OO " stands for .
But on top of that , the average person knows this format only as the " Microsoft Office 2007 " format.And rightfully , the " Microsoft Office 2007 " format is all it is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Calling it "OOXML" certainly can be confusing since it is easy to not know or remember what the "OO" stands for.
But on top of that, the average person knows this format only as the "Microsoft Office 2007" format.And rightfully, the "Microsoft Office 2007" format is all it is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067376</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068134</id>
	<title>Office 2007 is not OOXML compliant</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265642940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last time I read about it, Office 2007 does not generate documents that comply with OOXML.  Microsoft admitted that they would have to change their software to comply with their standard, and I think that might happen with the next release of Office.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last time I read about it , Office 2007 does not generate documents that comply with OOXML .
Microsoft admitted that they would have to change their software to comply with their standard , and I think that might happen with the next release of Office .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last time I read about it, Office 2007 does not generate documents that comply with OOXML.
Microsoft admitted that they would have to change their software to comply with their standard, and I think that might happen with the next release of Office.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068608</id>
	<title>"...only logic and mathematics can achieve truth."</title>
	<author>John Hasler</author>
	<datestamp>1265648520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So she was into string theory, was she?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So she was into string theory , was she ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So she was into string theory, was she?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067886</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>harlows\_monkeys</author>
	<datestamp>1265640000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>I mean, there's a clear relationship here that I find very amusing. Microsoft's OOXML, while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most users due to the pervasity of Microsoft Office, is not logically more interoperable due to the nature of what MS has done to the "open" standard.</p></div><p>Read both specs. Given two independent developers who have to implement entirely from the spec, they are for more likely to produce interoperable implementations if they use OOXML than if they use ODF.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I mean , there 's a clear relationship here that I find very amusing .
Microsoft 's OOXML , while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most users due to the pervasity of Microsoft Office , is not logically more interoperable due to the nature of what MS has done to the " open " standard.Read both specs .
Given two independent developers who have to implement entirely from the spec , they are for more likely to produce interoperable implementations if they use OOXML than if they use ODF .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I mean, there's a clear relationship here that I find very amusing.
Microsoft's OOXML, while sure to be empirically more interoperable with most users due to the pervasity of Microsoft Office, is not logically more interoperable due to the nature of what MS has done to the "open" standard.Read both specs.
Given two independent developers who have to implement entirely from the spec, they are for more likely to produce interoperable implementations if they use OOXML than if they use ODF.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31076628</id>
	<title>OOFDa</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265748120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They are just waiting for the OOFDa standard to be finalized!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They are just waiting for the OOFDa standard to be finalized !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They are just waiting for the OOFDa standard to be finalized!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067468</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265635620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's symptomatic.<br>The neat thing is, as more and more European governments make large scale use of ODF, the tool support should improve to match their needs. This makes it practical for more organizations to switch.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's symptomatic.The neat thing is , as more and more European governments make large scale use of ODF , the tool support should improve to match their needs .
This makes it practical for more organizations to switch .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's symptomatic.The neat thing is, as more and more European governments make large scale use of ODF, the tool support should improve to match their needs.
This makes it practical for more organizations to switch.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069242</id>
	<title>Two corrections</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265656380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>1. Norway has decided to use ODF allmost a year ago<br>2. Denmark has NOT choosen ODF, "we" made a positive list which contains one item, ODF, but may be expanded if the requirements a met.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...and several other countries has choosen ODF too.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>1 .
Norway has decided to use ODF allmost a year ago2 .
Denmark has NOT choosen ODF , " we " made a positive list which contains one item , ODF , but may be expanded if the requirements a met .
...and several other countries has choosen ODF too .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>1.
Norway has decided to use ODF allmost a year ago2.
Denmark has NOT choosen ODF, "we" made a positive list which contains one item, ODF, but may be expanded if the requirements a met.
...and several other countries has choosen ODF too.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068070</id>
	<title>Don't forget, MS is not locked out</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265642160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>MS is just as free to implement the OpenDocument format as anyone else; and they have in fact implemented ODF support.[1]  So, if ODF is chosen as the standard in Norway, the Norwegian government is still free to buy copies of Microsoft Office, as long as it can do a good job of reading and writing ODF files.</p><p>Of course, Microsoft will still view this as some kind of defeat, because they would prefer their own standard be adopted; OOXML will be just as much of a lockin trap as the older binary Microsoft formats.  If OOXML is adopted, everyone has to buy Microsoft Office; if ODF is adopted, everyone can choose from among many alternatives, several of which are completely free.</p><p>It is obvious why Microsoft would prefer OOXML adoption for government (and everywhere else).  It is less obvious why government should adopt OOXML instead of ODF.</p><p>[1] Microsoft resisted the inclusion of ODF import/export filters for some time, but finally decided to include them:<br><a href="http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20050930181153972" title="groklaw.net">http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20050930181153972</a> [groklaw.net]<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument\_software" title="wikipedia.org">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument\_software</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>steveha</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>MS is just as free to implement the OpenDocument format as anyone else ; and they have in fact implemented ODF support .
[ 1 ] So , if ODF is chosen as the standard in Norway , the Norwegian government is still free to buy copies of Microsoft Office , as long as it can do a good job of reading and writing ODF files.Of course , Microsoft will still view this as some kind of defeat , because they would prefer their own standard be adopted ; OOXML will be just as much of a lockin trap as the older binary Microsoft formats .
If OOXML is adopted , everyone has to buy Microsoft Office ; if ODF is adopted , everyone can choose from among many alternatives , several of which are completely free.It is obvious why Microsoft would prefer OOXML adoption for government ( and everywhere else ) .
It is less obvious why government should adopt OOXML instead of ODF .
[ 1 ] Microsoft resisted the inclusion of ODF import/export filters for some time , but finally decided to include them : http : //www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php ? story = 20050930181153972 [ groklaw.net ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument \ _software [ wikipedia.org ] steveha</tokentext>
<sentencetext>MS is just as free to implement the OpenDocument format as anyone else; and they have in fact implemented ODF support.
[1]  So, if ODF is chosen as the standard in Norway, the Norwegian government is still free to buy copies of Microsoft Office, as long as it can do a good job of reading and writing ODF files.Of course, Microsoft will still view this as some kind of defeat, because they would prefer their own standard be adopted; OOXML will be just as much of a lockin trap as the older binary Microsoft formats.
If OOXML is adopted, everyone has to buy Microsoft Office; if ODF is adopted, everyone can choose from among many alternatives, several of which are completely free.It is obvious why Microsoft would prefer OOXML adoption for government (and everywhere else).
It is less obvious why government should adopt OOXML instead of ODF.
[1] Microsoft resisted the inclusion of ODF import/export filters for some time, but finally decided to include them:http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20050930181153972 [groklaw.net]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument\_software [wikipedia.org]steveha</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224</id>
	<title>And?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265633880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>And the Norweigan government matters, why?  They're probably a drop in the bucket for Microsoft's revenue.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And the Norweigan government matters , why ?
They 're probably a drop in the bucket for Microsoft 's revenue .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And the Norweigan government matters, why?
They're probably a drop in the bucket for Microsoft's revenue.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067272</id>
	<title>Fredonia</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265634240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The government of Fredonia chooses<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.txt, ASCII, with \n line endings.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The government of Fredonia chooses .txt , ASCII , with \ n line endings .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The government of Fredonia chooses .txt, ASCII, with \n line endings.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067376</id>
	<title>Such a nicely chosen name for the standard...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265634960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>
OOXML.. I'm a regular user of Openoffice.  I'm pretty interested in it succeeding, and was pretty aware of the OOXML v. ODF issues a year ago.  And still, when I saw the title of this article, my first thought for 10 seconds was... oh shit.. they're ditching Openoffice in Scandanavia!

Almost like someone deliberately named OOXML to create a little confusion, isn't it?</htmltext>
<tokenext>OOXML.. I 'm a regular user of Openoffice .
I 'm pretty interested in it succeeding , and was pretty aware of the OOXML v. ODF issues a year ago .
And still , when I saw the title of this article , my first thought for 10 seconds was... oh shit.. they 're ditching Openoffice in Scandanavia !
Almost like someone deliberately named OOXML to create a little confusion , is n't it ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
OOXML.. I'm a regular user of Openoffice.
I'm pretty interested in it succeeding, and was pretty aware of the OOXML v. ODF issues a year ago.
And still, when I saw the title of this article, my first thought for 10 seconds was... oh shit.. they're ditching Openoffice in Scandanavia!
Almost like someone deliberately named OOXML to create a little confusion, isn't it?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067568</id>
	<title>Re:Such a nicely chosen name for the standard...</title>
	<author>click2005</author>
	<datestamp>1265636640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It still leaves them time to add OOXML Cloud 2.0 in a future release.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It still leaves them time to add OOXML Cloud 2.0 in a future release .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It still leaves them time to add OOXML Cloud 2.0 in a future release.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067514</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069758</id>
	<title>Haha</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265708880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What a bunch of suckers the U.S. has become. On domestic issues, the Slashdot crowd is all gung-ho on open source. But as soon as someone mentions a <i>foreign</i> nation discarding some proprietary Merkin B.S. software, all principles and freedom ideals are thrown overboard. LOLOLOLO RETARDS!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What a bunch of suckers the U.S. has become .
On domestic issues , the Slashdot crowd is all gung-ho on open source .
But as soon as someone mentions a foreign nation discarding some proprietary Merkin B.S .
software , all principles and freedom ideals are thrown overboard .
LOLOLOLO RETARDS !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What a bunch of suckers the U.S. has become.
On domestic issues, the Slashdot crowd is all gung-ho on open source.
But as soon as someone mentions a foreign nation discarding some proprietary Merkin B.S.
software, all principles and freedom ideals are thrown overboard.
LOLOLOLO RETARDS!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068604</id>
	<title>Re:Fredonia</title>
	<author>jjbenz</author>
	<datestamp>1265648520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The one south of Sheboygan?</htmltext>
<tokenext>The one south of Sheboygan ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The one south of Sheboygan?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067272</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069984</id>
	<title>Re:It isn't OOXML..</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265713260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, that's an Aztec deity.</p><p>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Aztec\_gods</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , that 's an Aztec deity.http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category : Aztec \ _gods</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, that's an Aztec deity.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Aztec\_gods</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067820</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068862</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265651220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>One of the core principles behind a standard I think is that it is immutable. It is a fixed, a priori known way of doing things. So that as long as you write a document following the standard, everyone can read and lay-out that document correctly by just following that same standard. Even if the document is from 10 years ago, or longer. Such as the standard with which a CD is recorded.
</p><p>But obviously not so for Microsoft: </p><p><div class="quote"><p>"It's natural in the development of standards that the standards evolve. That's the nature of standards,"</p></div><p>says a MS representative as quoted in TFA. This as reaction to the allegation by the Norwegian committee that OOXML is "unstable" and thus unsuitable as standard.
</p><p>Of course during the DEVELOPMENT a standard evolves, that's what development is about. After that it becomes a standard, and it becomes frozen to that standard. One can of course continue development, but that is going to be a new standard. An OOXML1.1 or so. Like with HTML which now and then gets an update in the form of a new standard.
</p><p>It seems to me that MS with such a statement confirms that from the beginning didn't plan on this to be a true standard, but that it would be a basis for them to start tacking on proprietary extensions, that then would prevent the standard to work across platforms. Luckily Norway saw through that, calls the standard "unstable" and refuses to included it in "recommended formats" for government use.
</p><p>The standard being proprietary has obviously nothing to do with it, as they happily do include Adobe's pdf format.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>One of the core principles behind a standard I think is that it is immutable .
It is a fixed , a priori known way of doing things .
So that as long as you write a document following the standard , everyone can read and lay-out that document correctly by just following that same standard .
Even if the document is from 10 years ago , or longer .
Such as the standard with which a CD is recorded .
But obviously not so for Microsoft : " It 's natural in the development of standards that the standards evolve .
That 's the nature of standards , " says a MS representative as quoted in TFA .
This as reaction to the allegation by the Norwegian committee that OOXML is " unstable " and thus unsuitable as standard .
Of course during the DEVELOPMENT a standard evolves , that 's what development is about .
After that it becomes a standard , and it becomes frozen to that standard .
One can of course continue development , but that is going to be a new standard .
An OOXML1.1 or so .
Like with HTML which now and then gets an update in the form of a new standard .
It seems to me that MS with such a statement confirms that from the beginning did n't plan on this to be a true standard , but that it would be a basis for them to start tacking on proprietary extensions , that then would prevent the standard to work across platforms .
Luckily Norway saw through that , calls the standard " unstable " and refuses to included it in " recommended formats " for government use .
The standard being proprietary has obviously nothing to do with it , as they happily do include Adobe 's pdf format .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One of the core principles behind a standard I think is that it is immutable.
It is a fixed, a priori known way of doing things.
So that as long as you write a document following the standard, everyone can read and lay-out that document correctly by just following that same standard.
Even if the document is from 10 years ago, or longer.
Such as the standard with which a CD is recorded.
But obviously not so for Microsoft: "It's natural in the development of standards that the standards evolve.
That's the nature of standards,"says a MS representative as quoted in TFA.
This as reaction to the allegation by the Norwegian committee that OOXML is "unstable" and thus unsuitable as standard.
Of course during the DEVELOPMENT a standard evolves, that's what development is about.
After that it becomes a standard, and it becomes frozen to that standard.
One can of course continue development, but that is going to be a new standard.
An OOXML1.1 or so.
Like with HTML which now and then gets an update in the form of a new standard.
It seems to me that MS with such a statement confirms that from the beginning didn't plan on this to be a true standard, but that it would be a basis for them to start tacking on proprietary extensions, that then would prevent the standard to work across platforms.
Luckily Norway saw through that, calls the standard "unstable" and refuses to included it in "recommended formats" for government use.
The standard being proprietary has obviously nothing to do with it, as they happily do include Adobe's pdf format.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067952</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069828</id>
	<title>Re:And?</title>
	<author>Robert Zenz</author>
	<datestamp>1265710440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The pattern is pretty similar to dictatorship and revolution...if one guy stands up against it, everybody is laughing, but somewhere someone is also standing up "Hey, if he can do it, I can do it, too!", and that's the point where the Domino-Effect kicks in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The pattern is pretty similar to dictatorship and revolution...if one guy stands up against it , everybody is laughing , but somewhere someone is also standing up " Hey , if he can do it , I can do it , too !
" , and that 's the point where the Domino-Effect kicks in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The pattern is pretty similar to dictatorship and revolution...if one guy stands up against it, everybody is laughing, but somewhere someone is also standing up "Hey, if he can do it, I can do it, too!
", and that's the point where the Domino-Effect kicks in.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31073620</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1265737320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Strange, that the name of the consultancy is Hypatia. She, after all, was a mathematician-philosopher who ascribed to Plotinus's ideal... that empirical research is inherently flawed, and only logic and mathematics can achieve truth.</p></div><p>She was also murdered by a mob of Christians, who accused her of being a pagan (she was), and trying to convert other Christians (she didn't)  - flayed alive by oyster shells, then burned while still alive.</p><p>Not sure if there's any clear relationship here. And definitely not amusing, if there is one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Strange , that the name of the consultancy is Hypatia .
She , after all , was a mathematician-philosopher who ascribed to Plotinus 's ideal... that empirical research is inherently flawed , and only logic and mathematics can achieve truth.She was also murdered by a mob of Christians , who accused her of being a pagan ( she was ) , and trying to convert other Christians ( she did n't ) - flayed alive by oyster shells , then burned while still alive.Not sure if there 's any clear relationship here .
And definitely not amusing , if there is one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Strange, that the name of the consultancy is Hypatia.
She, after all, was a mathematician-philosopher who ascribed to Plotinus's ideal... that empirical research is inherently flawed, and only logic and mathematics can achieve truth.She was also murdered by a mob of Christians, who accused her of being a pagan (she was), and trying to convert other Christians (she didn't)  - flayed alive by oyster shells, then burned while still alive.Not sure if there's any clear relationship here.
And definitely not amusing, if there is one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067882</id>
	<title>Re:What's in a name</title>
	<author>DoofusOfDeath</author>
	<datestamp>1265639940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>If users of MS Office share documents, that's not interoperability since they all use the same software family.</p></div></blockquote><p>Sure, OOXML works with both Country <i>and</i> Western!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>If users of MS Office share documents , that 's not interoperability since they all use the same software family.Sure , OOXML works with both Country and Western !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If users of MS Office share documents, that's not interoperability since they all use the same software family.Sure, OOXML works with both Country and Western!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069926
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31070944
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068070
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068918
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067886
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31073620
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068608
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068054
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068660
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067916
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067292
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067622
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067500
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068336
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069234
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068220
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069480
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069828
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067468
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067658
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067966
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067870
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067360
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069758
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31070168
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067534
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068604
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067272
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31070512
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068862
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067952
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067430
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069648
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067568
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067514
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067376
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_08_2319248_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067820
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_2319248.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067292
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067916
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_2319248.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068070
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31070944
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_2319248.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067820
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069984
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_2319248.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067376
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069234
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067514
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067568
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_2319248.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069628
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069758
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068604
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_2319248.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067224
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069828
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31070168
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067430
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069480
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067952
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068862
----http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31070512
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068054
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067468
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067360
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069648
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069732
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_2319248.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068134
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_08_2319248.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067300
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067966
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067472
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068660
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067882
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068220
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067870
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068336
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068608
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067622
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067534
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31067886
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31068918
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31069926
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_08_2319248.31073620
</commentlist>
</conversation>
