<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_09_2159245</id>
	<title>Jeff Jaffe Named CEO of W3C</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1268132280000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>blozza2070 notes the news that <a href="http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Jeff-Jaffe-now-W3C-CEO-Update-948319.html">Jeff Jaffe has been appointed CEO of the World Wide Web Consortium</a>. Until January Jaffe was CTO at Novell and, while his name hasn't come up very often in this community, he is one of the architects of the Novell-Microsoft patent deal. A reading of Jaffe's <a href="http://www.novell.com/ctoblog/">blog while at Novell</a> tends to paint him as a software patent supporter, Microsoft apologist, and no fan of the FSF. This strongly worded page at Boycott Novell features <a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2010/03/08/jeff-jaffe-w3c-workgroup/">copious links to support the above characterization</a>.</htmltext>
<tokenext>blozza2070 notes the news that Jeff Jaffe has been appointed CEO of the World Wide Web Consortium .
Until January Jaffe was CTO at Novell and , while his name has n't come up very often in this community , he is one of the architects of the Novell-Microsoft patent deal .
A reading of Jaffe 's blog while at Novell tends to paint him as a software patent supporter , Microsoft apologist , and no fan of the FSF .
This strongly worded page at Boycott Novell features copious links to support the above characterization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>blozza2070 notes the news that Jeff Jaffe has been appointed CEO of the World Wide Web Consortium.
Until January Jaffe was CTO at Novell and, while his name hasn't come up very often in this community, he is one of the architects of the Novell-Microsoft patent deal.
A reading of Jaffe's blog while at Novell tends to paint him as a software patent supporter, Microsoft apologist, and no fan of the FSF.
This strongly worded page at Boycott Novell features copious links to support the above characterization.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422792</id>
	<title>Oh thats just bloody fucking great!</title>
	<author>FlyingGuy</author>
	<datestamp>1268153400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The WC3 is getting a CEO that was the CTO at Novell.  Crap-fucking-tastic!</p><p>Yeah this is the same idiot that pushed Novell in the direction of self destruction along with the Idiot of a CEO who is more then likely going to get a hell of a golden parachute when Elliot takes Novell apart and scatters it to the 4 winds.</p><p>While I used to only think that the WC3 was worthless, now I am completely convinced.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The WC3 is getting a CEO that was the CTO at Novell .
Crap-fucking-tastic ! Yeah this is the same idiot that pushed Novell in the direction of self destruction along with the Idiot of a CEO who is more then likely going to get a hell of a golden parachute when Elliot takes Novell apart and scatters it to the 4 winds.While I used to only think that the WC3 was worthless , now I am completely convinced .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The WC3 is getting a CEO that was the CTO at Novell.
Crap-fucking-tastic!Yeah this is the same idiot that pushed Novell in the direction of self destruction along with the Idiot of a CEO who is more then likely going to get a hell of a golden parachute when Elliot takes Novell apart and scatters it to the 4 winds.While I used to only think that the WC3 was worthless, now I am completely convinced.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420876</id>
	<title>W3C dead already, WHATWG is the way to go</title>
	<author>loufoque</author>
	<datestamp>1268137440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The W3C is long dead already, the WHATWG is the way to go for the future.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The W3C is long dead already , the WHATWG is the way to go for the future .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The W3C is long dead already, the WHATWG is the way to go for the future.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31424140</id>
	<title>Re:How about?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268215680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because that group already pretty much exists, and is called WHATWG. It is the group that were responsible for creating and pushing HTML5. The problem is, HTML5 is also far worse than anything the W3C has ever had full responsibility for creating from the off, but they have had it foisted on them now.</p><p>I don't really trust Microsoft either, but we've got this situation now whereby even the other large tech names out there have demonstrated an inability to produce a sensible spec to take the web forward and have created this spec that is truly awful (okay, canvas is a good idea, and one or two other bits, but the majority is utterly shit).</p><p>So despite Microsoft raping the web with IE6, they've still never done as much damage as HTML5 looks to do with the fact the HTML5 makes bad practice the standard. HTML5 has basically set us up for another decade of bad practice and bad design at a point where, thanks to increased competition in the browser market, we finally had a chance to move the web away from it's fucked up historical position of being smothered with such bad practice and bad design. We finally had a chance to increase accessibility and yet instead, HTML5 seems to bring in new stuff without thought for accessibility that will actually make the web less accessible.</p><p>It seems we're fucked either way, but certainly there was nothing worse about Microsoft having more control of the web, things definitely haven't gotten any better now Mozilla, Google and Apple have far more sway, personally, I think they look set to get much worse with HTML5, making shit markup and shit practice the standard only benefits shit developers and creates a headache for the good developers out there.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because that group already pretty much exists , and is called WHATWG .
It is the group that were responsible for creating and pushing HTML5 .
The problem is , HTML5 is also far worse than anything the W3C has ever had full responsibility for creating from the off , but they have had it foisted on them now.I do n't really trust Microsoft either , but we 've got this situation now whereby even the other large tech names out there have demonstrated an inability to produce a sensible spec to take the web forward and have created this spec that is truly awful ( okay , canvas is a good idea , and one or two other bits , but the majority is utterly shit ) .So despite Microsoft raping the web with IE6 , they 've still never done as much damage as HTML5 looks to do with the fact the HTML5 makes bad practice the standard .
HTML5 has basically set us up for another decade of bad practice and bad design at a point where , thanks to increased competition in the browser market , we finally had a chance to move the web away from it 's fucked up historical position of being smothered with such bad practice and bad design .
We finally had a chance to increase accessibility and yet instead , HTML5 seems to bring in new stuff without thought for accessibility that will actually make the web less accessible.It seems we 're fucked either way , but certainly there was nothing worse about Microsoft having more control of the web , things definitely have n't gotten any better now Mozilla , Google and Apple have far more sway , personally , I think they look set to get much worse with HTML5 , making shit markup and shit practice the standard only benefits shit developers and creates a headache for the good developers out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because that group already pretty much exists, and is called WHATWG.
It is the group that were responsible for creating and pushing HTML5.
The problem is, HTML5 is also far worse than anything the W3C has ever had full responsibility for creating from the off, but they have had it foisted on them now.I don't really trust Microsoft either, but we've got this situation now whereby even the other large tech names out there have demonstrated an inability to produce a sensible spec to take the web forward and have created this spec that is truly awful (okay, canvas is a good idea, and one or two other bits, but the majority is utterly shit).So despite Microsoft raping the web with IE6, they've still never done as much damage as HTML5 looks to do with the fact the HTML5 makes bad practice the standard.
HTML5 has basically set us up for another decade of bad practice and bad design at a point where, thanks to increased competition in the browser market, we finally had a chance to move the web away from it's fucked up historical position of being smothered with such bad practice and bad design.
We finally had a chance to increase accessibility and yet instead, HTML5 seems to bring in new stuff without thought for accessibility that will actually make the web less accessible.It seems we're fucked either way, but certainly there was nothing worse about Microsoft having more control of the web, things definitely haven't gotten any better now Mozilla, Google and Apple have far more sway, personally, I think they look set to get much worse with HTML5, making shit markup and shit practice the standard only benefits shit developers and creates a headache for the good developers out there.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420862</id>
	<title>another jew ceo</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268137320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>nothing to see here move along</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>nothing to see here move along</tokentext>
<sentencetext>nothing to see here move along</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31427088</id>
	<title>Stargate W3C:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268240700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jaffe krie!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jaffe krie !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jaffe krie!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423770</id>
	<title>Re:Mixed Feelings</title>
	<author>Penguin</author>
	<datestamp>1268253960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p><div class="quote"><p>it will allow w3c to influence Microsoft more</p></div><p>Or do you mean allow Microsoft to influence W3C more?</p></div><p>The Sphinx: To learn my teachings, I must first teach you how to learn.</p><p>The Sphinx: He who questions training only trains himself at asking questions.</p><p>The Sphinx: When you care what is outside, what is inside cares for you.</p><p>Mr. Furious: Okay, am I the only one who finds these sayings just a little bit formulaic? "If you want to push something down, you have to pull it up. If you want to go left, you have to go right." It's...<br>The Sphinx: Your temper is very quick, my friend. But until you learn to master your rage...<br>Mr. Furious:<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...your rage will become your master? That's what you were going to say. Right? Right?<br>The Sphinx: Not necessarily.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it will allow w3c to influence Microsoft moreOr do you mean allow Microsoft to influence W3C more ? The Sphinx : To learn my teachings , I must first teach you how to learn.The Sphinx : He who questions training only trains himself at asking questions.The Sphinx : When you care what is outside , what is inside cares for you.Mr .
Furious : Okay , am I the only one who finds these sayings just a little bit formulaic ?
" If you want to push something down , you have to pull it up .
If you want to go left , you have to go right .
" It 's...The Sphinx : Your temper is very quick , my friend .
But until you learn to master your rage...Mr. Furious : ...your rage will become your master ?
That 's what you were going to say .
Right ? Right ? The Sphinx : Not necessarily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it will allow w3c to influence Microsoft moreOr do you mean allow Microsoft to influence W3C more?The Sphinx: To learn my teachings, I must first teach you how to learn.The Sphinx: He who questions training only trains himself at asking questions.The Sphinx: When you care what is outside, what is inside cares for you.Mr.
Furious: Okay, am I the only one who finds these sayings just a little bit formulaic?
"If you want to push something down, you have to pull it up.
If you want to go left, you have to go right.
" It's...The Sphinx: Your temper is very quick, my friend.
But until you learn to master your rage...Mr. Furious: ...your rage will become your master?
That's what you were going to say.
Right? Right?The Sphinx: Not necessarily.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420668</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421308</id>
	<title>Re:How about?</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1268140380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Precisely such a thing exists, and is called <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web\_Hypertext\_Application\_Technology\_Working\_Group" title="wikipedia.org">WHATWG</a> [wikipedia.org]. That said, specifically for HTML5 purposes, after developing it for a while separately from W3C, they've effectively forced W3C into dropping XHTML 2.0, and forming an HTML5 working group with essentially the same membership as WHATWG. The separate organization still exists, though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Precisely such a thing exists , and is called WHATWG [ wikipedia.org ] .
That said , specifically for HTML5 purposes , after developing it for a while separately from W3C , they 've effectively forced W3C into dropping XHTML 2.0 , and forming an HTML5 working group with essentially the same membership as WHATWG .
The separate organization still exists , though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Precisely such a thing exists, and is called WHATWG [wikipedia.org].
That said, specifically for HTML5 purposes, after developing it for a while separately from W3C, they've effectively forced W3C into dropping XHTML 2.0, and forming an HTML5 working group with essentially the same membership as WHATWG.
The separate organization still exists, though.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31426390</id>
	<title>Re:How about?</title>
	<author>Genwil</author>
	<datestamp>1268237700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Absolutely true. Great post. If I had mod points...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Absolutely true .
Great post .
If I had mod points.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Absolutely true.
Great post.
If I had mod points...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31424140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420894</id>
	<title>Ugh</title>
	<author>tjstork</author>
	<datestamp>1268137500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I have had queezy feelings about the W3C for some time now and this just makes them even sicker.  At this point, I would rather almost have the FSF friendly browser makers create a standards body that is, well, for those people that are interested in open systems and not playing leverage games with it.</p><p>I reminded of what became of OpenGL, when a cool little company tried to make a nice standard for everybody and instead the whole thing got hammered by a bunch of egos until it was more or less abandoned in mainstream Windows based 3D rendering.</p><p>Finally, I wish people could see that patents and lengthy copyrights are less free market than what we have now.  You can say a system is free market when it is really a hodge podge of government subsidies and monopoly grants.  I would propose that FSF people start calling themselves Free Market Services, and simultaneously label closed shops as Government Regulated Services, which is really what they are.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I have had queezy feelings about the W3C for some time now and this just makes them even sicker .
At this point , I would rather almost have the FSF friendly browser makers create a standards body that is , well , for those people that are interested in open systems and not playing leverage games with it.I reminded of what became of OpenGL , when a cool little company tried to make a nice standard for everybody and instead the whole thing got hammered by a bunch of egos until it was more or less abandoned in mainstream Windows based 3D rendering.Finally , I wish people could see that patents and lengthy copyrights are less free market than what we have now .
You can say a system is free market when it is really a hodge podge of government subsidies and monopoly grants .
I would propose that FSF people start calling themselves Free Market Services , and simultaneously label closed shops as Government Regulated Services , which is really what they are .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have had queezy feelings about the W3C for some time now and this just makes them even sicker.
At this point, I would rather almost have the FSF friendly browser makers create a standards body that is, well, for those people that are interested in open systems and not playing leverage games with it.I reminded of what became of OpenGL, when a cool little company tried to make a nice standard for everybody and instead the whole thing got hammered by a bunch of egos until it was more or less abandoned in mainstream Windows based 3D rendering.Finally, I wish people could see that patents and lengthy copyrights are less free market than what we have now.
You can say a system is free market when it is really a hodge podge of government subsidies and monopoly grants.
I would propose that FSF people start calling themselves Free Market Services, and simultaneously label closed shops as Government Regulated Services, which is really what they are.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423618</id>
	<title>Who is next on Micro$oft hit list?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268252160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>ISO <i>check</i><br>W3C <i>check</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>ISO checkW3C check</tokentext>
<sentencetext>ISO checkW3C check</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420744</id>
	<title>That's no human</title>
	<author>binarylarry</author>
	<datestamp>1268136660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>He's a clone of Bill Gates! Created by Microsoft over the span of the last decade to ensure Microsoft conquers the world!</p><p>Look and see: <a href="http://investincotedazur.com/en/newsletter/index.php?txt=act9129" title="investincotedazur.com">http://investincotedazur.com/en/newsletter/index.php?txt=act9129</a> [investincotedazur.com]</p><p>*tinfoil hat activated*</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>He 's a clone of Bill Gates !
Created by Microsoft over the span of the last decade to ensure Microsoft conquers the world ! Look and see : http : //investincotedazur.com/en/newsletter/index.php ? txt = act9129 [ investincotedazur.com ] * tinfoil hat activated *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>He's a clone of Bill Gates!
Created by Microsoft over the span of the last decade to ensure Microsoft conquers the world!Look and see: http://investincotedazur.com/en/newsletter/index.php?txt=act9129 [investincotedazur.com]*tinfoil hat activated*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420874</id>
	<title>Re:w3c outliving its usefulness</title>
	<author>binarylarry</author>
	<datestamp>1268137440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You have to have all of these people on board for things to work.</p><p>If no one even attempts a standard and everyone does their own thing in parallel, do you think it would make web developer *easier*?</p><p>No fucking way, it would mean you'd get to write the website 10x instead of 3x like you do now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You have to have all of these people on board for things to work.If no one even attempts a standard and everyone does their own thing in parallel , do you think it would make web developer * easier * ? No fucking way , it would mean you 'd get to write the website 10x instead of 3x like you do now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You have to have all of these people on board for things to work.If no one even attempts a standard and everyone does their own thing in parallel, do you think it would make web developer *easier*?No fucking way, it would mean you'd get to write the website 10x instead of 3x like you do now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422298</id>
	<title>Re:MSFT is pushing Silverlight</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1268148960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For precisely the same reason why Silverlight works in Firefox, Safari and Chrome, and on OS X and not just Windows.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For precisely the same reason why Silverlight works in Firefox , Safari and Chrome , and on OS X and not just Windows .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For precisely the same reason why Silverlight works in Firefox, Safari and Chrome, and on OS X and not just Windows.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420762</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421012</id>
	<title>Re:w3c outliving its usefulness</title>
	<author>Lunix Nutcase</author>
	<datestamp>1268138280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Maybe it should be run by people who have no ties to corporations and who develop open source software only.</p></div><p>So people who have no relevancy to the world.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe it should be run by people who have no ties to corporations and who develop open source software only.So people who have no relevancy to the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe it should be run by people who have no ties to corporations and who develop open source software only.So people who have no relevancy to the world.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421058</id>
	<title>Re:Oh, HIM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268138520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ah, yes.  Al Nugent.  You're right about him.  When he came to CA from Novell, I thought things were going to change for the better technically.  Alas, nobody can move a dinosaur.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ah , yes .
Al Nugent .
You 're right about him .
When he came to CA from Novell , I thought things were going to change for the better technically .
Alas , nobody can move a dinosaur .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ah, yes.
Al Nugent.
You're right about him.
When he came to CA from Novell, I thought things were going to change for the better technically.
Alas, nobody can move a dinosaur.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421746</id>
	<title>A Little History Lesson</title>
	<author>grcumb</author>
	<datestamp>1268143380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>How about we break away from the W3C and its strange policies and instead appoint a community-based chair with people from Mozilla, Apple, Opera, Google, Microsoft (if they would show) and anyone else who wanted to make a browser.</p></div><p>Who is this 'we' you keep talking about?</p><p>The W3C is a Consortium (that's the 'C') consisting of interested industry members. Right now, businesses who care how web technologies are developed have a vested interest in sitting down together and at least going through the motions of standardising languages and protocols.</p><p>The W3C might have democratic mechanisms, but it is neither a populist nor a grassroots organisation. It is, and always has been, an industry body.</p><p>I honestly don't know why Tim Berners-Lee decided that an industry consortium would be the best means to achieve web standards. I do know, however, that he chose deliberately and only after consideration. I suppose he hoped that collective interests would trump selfish motives and, if that failed, that other companies could be relied on to reign in the more egregious abuses.</p><p>It needs to be said that, in this respect at least, the W3C has been largely successful, but only in the way that standards bodies generally are: Through endless, awkward compromises that sometimes defy reason, and often with only reluctant support from the very people who developed the standards in the first place.</p><p>The W3C was born at a time when Netscape Communications ruled the roost, and acted like they didn't need anyone else. Virtually all of the abominations of early 'Tag Soup' HTML can be laid at Netscape's feet. Following that, we saw years of tug-of-war spec development, in which MS and Netscape defined their competing and incompatible implementations of numerous new elements and attributes.</p><p>But the W3C persevered and (painfully) slowly managed to bring us back from the brink to HTML 4 and eventually XHTML. There've been some interesting manoeuvres of late regarding WHATWG and HTML 5, but most interesting is the fact that the 'Tag Soup' crew and other unilateralists are more often on the defensive than in control. Much of that - indeed much of the conventional wisdom that Web Standards are Good -  is the result of the efforts of the W3C and its members.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about we break away from the W3C and its strange policies and instead appoint a community-based chair with people from Mozilla , Apple , Opera , Google , Microsoft ( if they would show ) and anyone else who wanted to make a browser.Who is this 'we ' you keep talking about ? The W3C is a Consortium ( that 's the 'C ' ) consisting of interested industry members .
Right now , businesses who care how web technologies are developed have a vested interest in sitting down together and at least going through the motions of standardising languages and protocols.The W3C might have democratic mechanisms , but it is neither a populist nor a grassroots organisation .
It is , and always has been , an industry body.I honestly do n't know why Tim Berners-Lee decided that an industry consortium would be the best means to achieve web standards .
I do know , however , that he chose deliberately and only after consideration .
I suppose he hoped that collective interests would trump selfish motives and , if that failed , that other companies could be relied on to reign in the more egregious abuses.It needs to be said that , in this respect at least , the W3C has been largely successful , but only in the way that standards bodies generally are : Through endless , awkward compromises that sometimes defy reason , and often with only reluctant support from the very people who developed the standards in the first place.The W3C was born at a time when Netscape Communications ruled the roost , and acted like they did n't need anyone else .
Virtually all of the abominations of early 'Tag Soup ' HTML can be laid at Netscape 's feet .
Following that , we saw years of tug-of-war spec development , in which MS and Netscape defined their competing and incompatible implementations of numerous new elements and attributes.But the W3C persevered and ( painfully ) slowly managed to bring us back from the brink to HTML 4 and eventually XHTML .
There 've been some interesting manoeuvres of late regarding WHATWG and HTML 5 , but most interesting is the fact that the 'Tag Soup ' crew and other unilateralists are more often on the defensive than in control .
Much of that - indeed much of the conventional wisdom that Web Standards are Good - is the result of the efforts of the W3C and its members .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about we break away from the W3C and its strange policies and instead appoint a community-based chair with people from Mozilla, Apple, Opera, Google, Microsoft (if they would show) and anyone else who wanted to make a browser.Who is this 'we' you keep talking about?The W3C is a Consortium (that's the 'C') consisting of interested industry members.
Right now, businesses who care how web technologies are developed have a vested interest in sitting down together and at least going through the motions of standardising languages and protocols.The W3C might have democratic mechanisms, but it is neither a populist nor a grassroots organisation.
It is, and always has been, an industry body.I honestly don't know why Tim Berners-Lee decided that an industry consortium would be the best means to achieve web standards.
I do know, however, that he chose deliberately and only after consideration.
I suppose he hoped that collective interests would trump selfish motives and, if that failed, that other companies could be relied on to reign in the more egregious abuses.It needs to be said that, in this respect at least, the W3C has been largely successful, but only in the way that standards bodies generally are: Through endless, awkward compromises that sometimes defy reason, and often with only reluctant support from the very people who developed the standards in the first place.The W3C was born at a time when Netscape Communications ruled the roost, and acted like they didn't need anyone else.
Virtually all of the abominations of early 'Tag Soup' HTML can be laid at Netscape's feet.
Following that, we saw years of tug-of-war spec development, in which MS and Netscape defined their competing and incompatible implementations of numerous new elements and attributes.But the W3C persevered and (painfully) slowly managed to bring us back from the brink to HTML 4 and eventually XHTML.
There've been some interesting manoeuvres of late regarding WHATWG and HTML 5, but most interesting is the fact that the 'Tag Soup' crew and other unilateralists are more often on the defensive than in control.
Much of that - indeed much of the conventional wisdom that Web Standards are Good -  is the result of the efforts of the W3C and its members.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420762</id>
	<title>MSFT is pushing Silverlight</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268136780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...so why would they care anymore whether IE will ever be compliant as long as corporate IT continue to make IE the default browser?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...so why would they care anymore whether IE will ever be compliant as long as corporate IT continue to make IE the default browser ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...so why would they care anymore whether IE will ever be compliant as long as corporate IT continue to make IE the default browser?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421048</id>
	<title>Jeff Jaffe</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268138520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Should be replaced by Chris Cross.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Should be replaced by Chris Cross .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Should be replaced by Chris Cross.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421520</id>
	<title>Re:Oh, HIM</title>
	<author>h4rr4r</author>
	<datestamp>1268141640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That is all CTOs, they are all empty suits.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That is all CTOs , they are all empty suits .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That is all CTOs, they are all empty suits.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420742</id>
	<title>Break out the tar and feathers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268136660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Microsoft apologist"... is that like a "communist sympathizer"?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Microsoft apologist " ... is that like a " communist sympathizer " ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Microsoft apologist"... is that like a "communist sympathizer"?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421196</id>
	<title>How will this affect HTML5 video???</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268139600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is terrible news.</p><p>His swan song even talks about the "great satisfaction" of working with "Inventive people who write more software patents per capita than anywhere else".</p><p>HTML5 already has big problems with software patents forcing it to exclude all video format recommendations.  What influence will this guy have in W3C?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is terrible news.His swan song even talks about the " great satisfaction " of working with " Inventive people who write more software patents per capita than anywhere else " .HTML5 already has big problems with software patents forcing it to exclude all video format recommendations .
What influence will this guy have in W3C ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is terrible news.His swan song even talks about the "great satisfaction" of working with "Inventive people who write more software patents per capita than anywhere else".HTML5 already has big problems with software patents forcing it to exclude all video format recommendations.
What influence will this guy have in W3C?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31426622</id>
	<title>HTML5 video</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268238660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a great chance. Since he seems to be friendly to patents and unfriendly to the FSF, maybe his influence will lead to finally getting a standard video format for HTML5. One that is actually good, like H.264.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a great chance .
Since he seems to be friendly to patents and unfriendly to the FSF , maybe his influence will lead to finally getting a standard video format for HTML5 .
One that is actually good , like H.264 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a great chance.
Since he seems to be friendly to patents and unfriendly to the FSF, maybe his influence will lead to finally getting a standard video format for HTML5.
One that is actually good, like H.264.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794</id>
	<title>w3c outliving its usefulness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268137020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Given all of the link ins between the w3C and the corporations, maybe it is times  to abolish it and start with a new standards body. One of the problem with involving companies like Microsoft in this is that they tend to try to subvert the process to keep standards from addressing needs, so they can implement their own proprietary solutions (like video in html5). Maybe it should be run by people who have no ties to corporations and who develop open source software only. Or why not allow the people who run it to be elected by the internet community at large rather than profit proprietary technology companies?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Given all of the link ins between the w3C and the corporations , maybe it is times to abolish it and start with a new standards body .
One of the problem with involving companies like Microsoft in this is that they tend to try to subvert the process to keep standards from addressing needs , so they can implement their own proprietary solutions ( like video in html5 ) .
Maybe it should be run by people who have no ties to corporations and who develop open source software only .
Or why not allow the people who run it to be elected by the internet community at large rather than profit proprietary technology companies ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given all of the link ins between the w3C and the corporations, maybe it is times  to abolish it and start with a new standards body.
One of the problem with involving companies like Microsoft in this is that they tend to try to subvert the process to keep standards from addressing needs, so they can implement their own proprietary solutions (like video in html5).
Maybe it should be run by people who have no ties to corporations and who develop open source software only.
Or why not allow the people who run it to be elected by the internet community at large rather than profit proprietary technology companies?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421492</id>
	<title>Re:How about?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268141460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What do you think the W3C is? It&rsquo;s exactly that! And believe it or not, parts of the most important standards even came from Microsoft people. They are not <em>all</em> evil, you know.</p><p>I&rsquo;m very happy that we now, for the first time, finally have all browsers support one single set of standards (XHTML 1.x / CSS 2.x / DOM 2 / JS), by listening to the W3C again. Instead of the chaos of the entire 90s and 00s!</p><p>What strange policies are you talking about? I find the work of the W3C nice. They care. Which is obvious, since they <em>are</em> the browser makers, amongst other interested groups.</p><p>Are you even a web developer?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What do you think the W3C is ?
It    s exactly that !
And believe it or not , parts of the most important standards even came from Microsoft people .
They are not all evil , you know.I    m very happy that we now , for the first time , finally have all browsers support one single set of standards ( XHTML 1.x / CSS 2.x / DOM 2 / JS ) , by listening to the W3C again .
Instead of the chaos of the entire 90s and 00s ! What strange policies are you talking about ?
I find the work of the W3C nice .
They care .
Which is obvious , since they are the browser makers , amongst other interested groups.Are you even a web developer ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What do you think the W3C is?
It’s exactly that!
And believe it or not, parts of the most important standards even came from Microsoft people.
They are not all evil, you know.I’m very happy that we now, for the first time, finally have all browsers support one single set of standards (XHTML 1.x / CSS 2.x / DOM 2 / JS), by listening to the W3C again.
Instead of the chaos of the entire 90s and 00s!What strange policies are you talking about?
I find the work of the W3C nice.
They care.
Which is obvious, since they are the browser makers, amongst other interested groups.Are you even a web developer?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422750</id>
	<title>Re:How about?</title>
	<author>mnot</author>
	<datestamp>1268153040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because the Web is more than a browser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because the Web is more than a browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because the Web is more than a browser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420706</id>
	<title>How does it feel</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268136420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>How does it feel to know that your arrival precipitated the death of one of the world's most important standards setting organizations?</p><p>This guy should be fired before he starts.  Then the people who hired him should also be fired.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>How does it feel to know that your arrival precipitated the death of one of the world 's most important standards setting organizations ? This guy should be fired before he starts .
Then the people who hired him should also be fired .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How does it feel to know that your arrival precipitated the death of one of the world's most important standards setting organizations?This guy should be fired before he starts.
Then the people who hired him should also be fired.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31430488</id>
	<title>Re:How about?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268213280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Which new thing in HTML5 has bad accessibility? I can only think of things where the accessibility is improved in comparison to HTML4/XHTML1.</p><p>What other things in HTML5 do you think are shit?</p><p>IMHO HTML5 seems to mend some of the messes left by HTML4 and XTHML1 (SGML speced but tag-soup implemented; inconsistencies introduced from HTML4 to XHTML1; the mess with Appendix C / XHTML1 sent as text/html which then gets parsed as malformed HTML4). There are many examples where the web related specs from the W3C specify something that runs contrary to what is currently implemented with no realistic idea how to implement what is specified without breaking the widespread documents that work with what is currently implemented.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Which new thing in HTML5 has bad accessibility ?
I can only think of things where the accessibility is improved in comparison to HTML4/XHTML1.What other things in HTML5 do you think are shit ? IMHO HTML5 seems to mend some of the messes left by HTML4 and XTHML1 ( SGML speced but tag-soup implemented ; inconsistencies introduced from HTML4 to XHTML1 ; the mess with Appendix C / XHTML1 sent as text/html which then gets parsed as malformed HTML4 ) .
There are many examples where the web related specs from the W3C specify something that runs contrary to what is currently implemented with no realistic idea how to implement what is specified without breaking the widespread documents that work with what is currently implemented .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Which new thing in HTML5 has bad accessibility?
I can only think of things where the accessibility is improved in comparison to HTML4/XHTML1.What other things in HTML5 do you think are shit?IMHO HTML5 seems to mend some of the messes left by HTML4 and XTHML1 (SGML speced but tag-soup implemented; inconsistencies introduced from HTML4 to XHTML1; the mess with Appendix C / XHTML1 sent as text/html which then gets parsed as malformed HTML4).
There are many examples where the web related specs from the W3C specify something that runs contrary to what is currently implemented with no realistic idea how to implement what is specified without breaking the widespread documents that work with what is currently implemented.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31424140</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423556</id>
	<title>Re:w3c outliving its usefulness</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268164440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem is, you need all these constituents at the table -- corporate reps and independent geeks. For this reason, the W3C invited &gt;100 independent folks to participate in the HTML5 Working Group.  It's been a zoo, but at least the doors were open and those folks were at the table.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem is , you need all these constituents at the table -- corporate reps and independent geeks .
For this reason , the W3C invited &gt; 100 independent folks to participate in the HTML5 Working Group .
It 's been a zoo , but at least the doors were open and those folks were at the table .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem is, you need all these constituents at the table -- corporate reps and independent geeks.
For this reason, the W3C invited &gt;100 independent folks to participate in the HTML5 Working Group.
It's been a zoo, but at least the doors were open and those folks were at the table.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420668</id>
	<title>Re:Mixed Feelings</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268136240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it will allow w3c to influence Microsoft more</p></div><p>Or do you mean allow Microsoft to influence W3C more?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it will allow w3c to influence Microsoft moreOr do you mean allow Microsoft to influence W3C more ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it will allow w3c to influence Microsoft moreOr do you mean allow Microsoft to influence W3C more?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421870</id>
	<title>JJJ</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268144640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The headline should read:</p><p>Jeff Jaffe, Jefe.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The headline should read : Jeff Jaffe , Jefe .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The headline should read:Jeff Jaffe, Jefe.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423628</id>
	<title>MOD PARENT UP</title>
	<author>Neoprofin</author>
	<datestamp>1268252400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>[x] Used specifically to cause fear and hatred<br>
[x] Vague enough to be supportable with only a few quotes<br>
[x] Generally irrelevant to the subject at hand<br>
[x] Frequently irrational<br>
[x] Heavily stigmatized in the community<br> <br>

We may have a winner.</htmltext>
<tokenext>[ x ] Used specifically to cause fear and hatred [ x ] Vague enough to be supportable with only a few quotes [ x ] Generally irrelevant to the subject at hand [ x ] Frequently irrational [ x ] Heavily stigmatized in the community We may have a winner .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>[x] Used specifically to cause fear and hatred
[x] Vague enough to be supportable with only a few quotes
[x] Generally irrelevant to the subject at hand
[x] Frequently irrational
[x] Heavily stigmatized in the community 

We may have a winner.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420742</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422104</id>
	<title>SG1</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268146440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Kree Jaffe!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Kree Jaffe !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Kree Jaffe!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792</id>
	<title>How about?</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1268137020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How about we break away from the W3C and its strange policies and instead appoint a community-based chair with people from Mozilla, Apple, Opera, Google, Microsoft (if they would show) and anyone else who wanted to make a browser. I'm not really seeing the benefit of the W3C lately, and with this, why don't we just break away?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How about we break away from the W3C and its strange policies and instead appoint a community-based chair with people from Mozilla , Apple , Opera , Google , Microsoft ( if they would show ) and anyone else who wanted to make a browser .
I 'm not really seeing the benefit of the W3C lately , and with this , why do n't we just break away ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How about we break away from the W3C and its strange policies and instead appoint a community-based chair with people from Mozilla, Apple, Opera, Google, Microsoft (if they would show) and anyone else who wanted to make a browser.
I'm not really seeing the benefit of the W3C lately, and with this, why don't we just break away?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421996</id>
	<title>No more consequences.</title>
	<author>Jeremy Allison - Sam</author>
	<datestamp>1268145600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yet more proof, if it were needed, that once you reach the CXX level there are never any consequences for any of your actions<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:-(.</p><p>Jeremy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yet more proof , if it were needed , that once you reach the CXX level there are never any consequences for any of your actions : - ( .Jeremy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yet more proof, if it were needed, that once you reach the CXX level there are never any consequences for any of your actions :-(.Jeremy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420638</id>
	<title>I loved his Mad magazine comics</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268136120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>tsia</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>tsia</tokentext>
<sentencetext>tsia</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420782</id>
	<title>Re:Mixed Feelings</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268136960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As long as Microsoft had a decent standard, that could be implemented without patent/IP-rights, I don't even care that much. A workable standard people follow is better that a perfect standard that 70\% of deployed browser instances promptly ignore.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As long as Microsoft had a decent standard , that could be implemented without patent/IP-rights , I do n't even care that much .
A workable standard people follow is better that a perfect standard that 70 \ % of deployed browser instances promptly ignore .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As long as Microsoft had a decent standard, that could be implemented without patent/IP-rights, I don't even care that much.
A workable standard people follow is better that a perfect standard that 70\% of deployed browser instances promptly ignore.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423910</id>
	<title>Re:Oh, HIM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268212380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Say what you want about his writing, but you can't fault his drawing.  The Mad Magazine "Fold-In" features are fantastic.</p><p>Oh.  You said <em>Jeff</em>.  Never mind...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Say what you want about his writing , but you ca n't fault his drawing .
The Mad Magazine " Fold-In " features are fantastic.Oh .
You said Jeff .
Never mind.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Say what you want about his writing, but you can't fault his drawing.
The Mad Magazine "Fold-In" features are fantastic.Oh.
You said Jeff.
Never mind...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423578</id>
	<title>Re:Oh, HIM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268251320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>May be true about some CTOs, but not apparently this one.  If you had bothered to read his info at: http://www.w3.org/People/Jeff/ (linked off the press release), you'd see that Jeff has a BS in Mathematics, an MS in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, and  PhD in Computer Science -- all from MIT.  Hardly a slouch resume.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>May be true about some CTOs , but not apparently this one .
If you had bothered to read his info at : http : //www.w3.org/People/Jeff/ ( linked off the press release ) , you 'd see that Jeff has a BS in Mathematics , an MS in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science , and PhD in Computer Science -- all from MIT .
Hardly a slouch resume .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>May be true about some CTOs, but not apparently this one.
If you had bothered to read his info at: http://www.w3.org/People/Jeff/ (linked off the press release), you'd see that Jeff has a BS in Mathematics, an MS in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, and  PhD in Computer Science -- all from MIT.
Hardly a slouch resume.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421018</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594</id>
	<title>Mixed Feelings</title>
	<author>pwnies</author>
	<datestamp>1268135880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I have mixed feelings on this. While it's true that he does appear to be fairly biased against the FSF's philosophy, at the same time he also has good diplomatic relations with Microsoft (this could be a good thing). The reason why this could be a good thing is that hopefully (and this is a big hopefully) it will allow w3c to influence Microsoft more when it comes to adhering to web standards in IE.<br>
Obviously this can go the other way as well, with IE imposing its standards onto w3c, and forcing the spec itself to change/adapt. Pray to RMS that it goes the way of the former.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I have mixed feelings on this .
While it 's true that he does appear to be fairly biased against the FSF 's philosophy , at the same time he also has good diplomatic relations with Microsoft ( this could be a good thing ) .
The reason why this could be a good thing is that hopefully ( and this is a big hopefully ) it will allow w3c to influence Microsoft more when it comes to adhering to web standards in IE .
Obviously this can go the other way as well , with IE imposing its standards onto w3c , and forcing the spec itself to change/adapt .
Pray to RMS that it goes the way of the former .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I have mixed feelings on this.
While it's true that he does appear to be fairly biased against the FSF's philosophy, at the same time he also has good diplomatic relations with Microsoft (this could be a good thing).
The reason why this could be a good thing is that hopefully (and this is a big hopefully) it will allow w3c to influence Microsoft more when it comes to adhering to web standards in IE.
Obviously this can go the other way as well, with IE imposing its standards onto w3c, and forcing the spec itself to change/adapt.
Pray to RMS that it goes the way of the former.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422300</id>
	<title>Witch hunts</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268148960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I love the smell of witch hunts in the morning. That guy wasn't a "key architect" of the Novell deal, he wasn't even part of the company's leadership when it was finalized between Hovsepian and Ballmer. What he did do for many years was run the openSUSE project. But why let facts get in the way? The submitter of this flamebait (because what does one call it?) is one of BoycottNovell's groupies. He hangs out on their chat room as "ender270" and is currently in the middle of a legal dispute with David Schlesinger, one of the members of the GNOME board of directors - who incidentally was also attacked by BoycottNovell - subsequently the proprietor "Dr." Schestowitz was forced to issue an <a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2009/07/13/correction-about-schlesinger/" title="boycottnovell.com" rel="nofollow">apology</a> [boycottnovell.com] for that.</p><p>But of course, his crime is that he dared work for Novell. For this he should be punished for all eternity.</p><p>BoycottNovell and the 12 people (including one of our <a href="http://slashdot.org/~SockDisclosure/journal/214377" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">past</a> [slashdot.org] resident trolls) who count themselves as members of that "community" are the ass-end of FOSS advocacy.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I love the smell of witch hunts in the morning .
That guy was n't a " key architect " of the Novell deal , he was n't even part of the company 's leadership when it was finalized between Hovsepian and Ballmer .
What he did do for many years was run the openSUSE project .
But why let facts get in the way ?
The submitter of this flamebait ( because what does one call it ?
) is one of BoycottNovell 's groupies .
He hangs out on their chat room as " ender270 " and is currently in the middle of a legal dispute with David Schlesinger , one of the members of the GNOME board of directors - who incidentally was also attacked by BoycottNovell - subsequently the proprietor " Dr. " Schestowitz was forced to issue an apology [ boycottnovell.com ] for that.But of course , his crime is that he dared work for Novell .
For this he should be punished for all eternity.BoycottNovell and the 12 people ( including one of our past [ slashdot.org ] resident trolls ) who count themselves as members of that " community " are the ass-end of FOSS advocacy .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I love the smell of witch hunts in the morning.
That guy wasn't a "key architect" of the Novell deal, he wasn't even part of the company's leadership when it was finalized between Hovsepian and Ballmer.
What he did do for many years was run the openSUSE project.
But why let facts get in the way?
The submitter of this flamebait (because what does one call it?
) is one of BoycottNovell's groupies.
He hangs out on their chat room as "ender270" and is currently in the middle of a legal dispute with David Schlesinger, one of the members of the GNOME board of directors - who incidentally was also attacked by BoycottNovell - subsequently the proprietor "Dr." Schestowitz was forced to issue an apology [boycottnovell.com] for that.But of course, his crime is that he dared work for Novell.
For this he should be punished for all eternity.BoycottNovell and the 12 people (including one of our past [slashdot.org] resident trolls) who count themselves as members of that "community" are the ass-end of FOSS advocacy.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421578</id>
	<title>Re:w3c outliving its usefulness</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1268142000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Uuum, and so is everybody else in there. Believe me, IBM doesn&rsquo;t like MS fucking up W3C. And so do the others.</p><p>But I agree about election in general. Just that that is even easier to subvert, since people are cattle. Look at the government elections. That is what would happen. Only worse.</p><p>If, then it should be decided by competent people. election power = competence. election actual choice = election power * election choice.<br>competence = measured by others with competence.<br>The only problem is, how to start this. And I&rsquo;m still not sure that this can&rsquo;t be subverted just as easily.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Uuum , and so is everybody else in there .
Believe me , IBM doesn    t like MS fucking up W3C .
And so do the others.But I agree about election in general .
Just that that is even easier to subvert , since people are cattle .
Look at the government elections .
That is what would happen .
Only worse.If , then it should be decided by competent people .
election power = competence .
election actual choice = election power * election choice.competence = measured by others with competence.The only problem is , how to start this .
And I    m still not sure that this can    t be subverted just as easily .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Uuum, and so is everybody else in there.
Believe me, IBM doesn’t like MS fucking up W3C.
And so do the others.But I agree about election in general.
Just that that is even easier to subvert, since people are cattle.
Look at the government elections.
That is what would happen.
Only worse.If, then it should be decided by competent people.
election power = competence.
election actual choice = election power * election choice.competence = measured by others with competence.The only problem is, how to start this.
And I’m still not sure that this can’t be subverted just as easily.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421018</id>
	<title>Re:Oh, HIM</title>
	<author>Princeofcups</author>
	<datestamp>1268138340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>They're full of the most buzzword-laden bullshit I've ever seen from a CTO who is supposed to know what things are about technically.</p></div><p>Don't let the T in CTO confuse you.  CTOs are generally MBAs who barely know their way around a PC, much less a server or network.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>They 're full of the most buzzword-laden bullshit I 've ever seen from a CTO who is supposed to know what things are about technically.Do n't let the T in CTO confuse you .
CTOs are generally MBAs who barely know their way around a PC , much less a server or network .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They're full of the most buzzword-laden bullshit I've ever seen from a CTO who is supposed to know what things are about technically.Don't let the T in CTO confuse you.
CTOs are generally MBAs who barely know their way around a PC, much less a server or network.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420898</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421466</id>
	<title>Re:Mixed Feelings</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268141340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A good thing for Microsoft maybe. Expect the W3C to start saying the IE way is the standard anyday now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A good thing for Microsoft maybe .
Expect the W3C to start saying the IE way is the standard anyday now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A good thing for Microsoft maybe.
Expect the W3C to start saying the IE way is the standard anyday now.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423750</id>
	<title>Look up "decommoditizing protocols"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268253720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em><br>And believe it or not, parts of the most important standards even came from Microsoft people.<br></em></p><p>Yeah. And I wish they'd stay out of it. Have a look at the revolting mess SOAP is. They messed up WebDAV (locking, anyone?). They severely damaged UTF-8 (BOM? Ferchrissake!).</p><p>Every standard they got their little dirty fingers in tends to evolve into a huge steaming pile of shit. As if there were some purpose in it (but who knows -- it might be just natural evolution<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>And believe it or not , parts of the most important standards even came from Microsoft people.Yeah .
And I wish they 'd stay out of it .
Have a look at the revolting mess SOAP is .
They messed up WebDAV ( locking , anyone ? ) .
They severely damaged UTF-8 ( BOM ?
Ferchrissake ! ) .Every standard they got their little dirty fingers in tends to evolve into a huge steaming pile of shit .
As if there were some purpose in it ( but who knows -- it might be just natural evolution : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>And believe it or not, parts of the most important standards even came from Microsoft people.Yeah.
And I wish they'd stay out of it.
Have a look at the revolting mess SOAP is.
They messed up WebDAV (locking, anyone?).
They severely damaged UTF-8 (BOM?
Ferchrissake!).Every standard they got their little dirty fingers in tends to evolve into a huge steaming pile of shit.
As if there were some purpose in it (but who knows -- it might be just natural evolution :)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420898</id>
	<title>Oh, HIM</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268137500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you aren't familiar with Jeffe Jaffe, just read his Novell blogs. They're full of the most buzzword-laden bullshit I've ever seen from a CTO who is supposed to know what things are about technically. He certanly wasn't fit to fill Alan Nugent's shoes. While I didn't get the impression from what I'd read that he was a Microsoft apologist (although I certainly wouldn't be surprised), it wouldn't be so bad if I had actually seen him write (or even type) two words of sense together.<br> <br>

I can't fathom how people like that get jobs like this, what on Earth he is going to do (conversations with Tim Berners-Lee are likely to be cut rather short) and why this is deemed to be news. It's just another nail in the coffin of the W3C to have an idiot CEO like this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you are n't familiar with Jeffe Jaffe , just read his Novell blogs .
They 're full of the most buzzword-laden bullshit I 've ever seen from a CTO who is supposed to know what things are about technically .
He certanly was n't fit to fill Alan Nugent 's shoes .
While I did n't get the impression from what I 'd read that he was a Microsoft apologist ( although I certainly would n't be surprised ) , it would n't be so bad if I had actually seen him write ( or even type ) two words of sense together .
I ca n't fathom how people like that get jobs like this , what on Earth he is going to do ( conversations with Tim Berners-Lee are likely to be cut rather short ) and why this is deemed to be news .
It 's just another nail in the coffin of the W3C to have an idiot CEO like this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you aren't familiar with Jeffe Jaffe, just read his Novell blogs.
They're full of the most buzzword-laden bullshit I've ever seen from a CTO who is supposed to know what things are about technically.
He certanly wasn't fit to fill Alan Nugent's shoes.
While I didn't get the impression from what I'd read that he was a Microsoft apologist (although I certainly wouldn't be surprised), it wouldn't be so bad if I had actually seen him write (or even type) two words of sense together.
I can't fathom how people like that get jobs like this, what on Earth he is going to do (conversations with Tim Berners-Lee are likely to be cut rather short) and why this is deemed to be news.
It's just another nail in the coffin of the W3C to have an idiot CEO like this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421314</id>
	<title>Re:w3c outliving its usefulness</title>
	<author>DragonWriter</author>
	<datestamp>1268140380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>Given all of the link ins between the w3C and the corporations, maybe it is times to abolish it and start with a new standards body.</p></div> </blockquote><p>The links between W3C and the corporations that actually implement technology used on the web are one of the things that make it useful as a standards body.</p><p>If the major vendors weren't involved in the standards body, it would be an academic exercise with no impact on the real world.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Given all of the link ins between the w3C and the corporations , maybe it is times to abolish it and start with a new standards body .
The links between W3C and the corporations that actually implement technology used on the web are one of the things that make it useful as a standards body.If the major vendors were n't involved in the standards body , it would be an academic exercise with no impact on the real world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Given all of the link ins between the w3C and the corporations, maybe it is times to abolish it and start with a new standards body.
The links between W3C and the corporations that actually implement technology used on the web are one of the things that make it useful as a standards body.If the major vendors weren't involved in the standards body, it would be an academic exercise with no impact on the real world.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421272</id>
	<title>Re:Mixed Feelings</title>
	<author>Schraegstrichpunkt</author>
	<datestamp>1268140140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I always laugh when someone thinks they're going to influence Microsoft, rather than the other way around.  Ain't gonna happen.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I always laugh when someone thinks they 're going to influence Microsoft , rather than the other way around .
Ai n't gon na happen .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I always laugh when someone thinks they're going to influence Microsoft, rather than the other way around.
Ain't gonna happen.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31424660</id>
	<title>Oblig</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268224260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Jeff Jaffe? Isnt that a character in Star Wars?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Jeff Jaffe ?
Isnt that a character in Star Wars ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Jeff Jaffe?
Isnt that a character in Star Wars?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423964</id>
	<title>Boycott Novell does not back up its claims</title>
	<author>harlows\_monkeys</author>
	<datestamp>1268213040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> This strongly worded page at Boycott Novell features copious links to support the above characterization</p></div><p>Those "copious links" point to other Boycott Novell pages. And the cites in most of those also point to Boycott Novell pages. If you actually follow all of these until you get external links, the external links don't back the Boycott Novell claims.</p><p>This is typical of that site. It will make some claim, sometimes being semi-honest and marking it as speculation or just suspicious, and cite an external source. Then, a bit later, it will repeat the claim, without marking it as speculative, and it will cite the earlier BN page, not the original source. By the third time, it is reporting it as fact, and only citing tertiary or later BN pages.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This strongly worded page at Boycott Novell features copious links to support the above characterizationThose " copious links " point to other Boycott Novell pages .
And the cites in most of those also point to Boycott Novell pages .
If you actually follow all of these until you get external links , the external links do n't back the Boycott Novell claims.This is typical of that site .
It will make some claim , sometimes being semi-honest and marking it as speculation or just suspicious , and cite an external source .
Then , a bit later , it will repeat the claim , without marking it as speculative , and it will cite the earlier BN page , not the original source .
By the third time , it is reporting it as fact , and only citing tertiary or later BN pages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> This strongly worded page at Boycott Novell features copious links to support the above characterizationThose "copious links" point to other Boycott Novell pages.
And the cites in most of those also point to Boycott Novell pages.
If you actually follow all of these until you get external links, the external links don't back the Boycott Novell claims.This is typical of that site.
It will make some claim, sometimes being semi-honest and marking it as speculation or just suspicious, and cite an external source.
Then, a bit later, it will repeat the claim, without marking it as speculative, and it will cite the earlier BN page, not the original source.
By the third time, it is reporting it as fact, and only citing tertiary or later BN pages.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420654</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268136120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Microsoft apologist? please...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft apologist ?
please.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft apologist?
please...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421384</id>
	<title>"Copious links"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268140920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> This strongly worded page at Boycott Novell features copious links to support the above characterization.</p></div><p>So I follow the link in TFS. And? I see a barely coherent rant about "evil enemies of Linux" infiltrating W3C - a bunch of links to that effect, but none to do specifically with Jeff - followed by the part that actually mentions him as the new "evil guy" on the block. The specific quote is "He was chosen despite his love for software patents", followed by 3 links. Of those, only two are actually unique (#2 and #3 are the same link). I reproduce them here, in order, for convenience:</p><p><a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2009/02/21/mono-moonlight-novl-strategy/" title="boycottnovell.com">http://boycottnovell.com/2009/02/21/mono-moonlight-novl-strategy/</a> [boycottnovell.com]<br><a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2010/01/31/jeff-jaffe-and-zonker-quit/" title="boycottnovell.com">http://boycottnovell.com/2010/01/31/jeff-jaffe-and-zonker-quit/</a> [boycottnovell.com]</p><p>Now, here's the thing. Neither one of those even contains the word "patent" anywhere, much less in any citations!<br>Apparently - judging by the first of those links - the sole reason why they even speak of his "love of software patents" is because he dares to promote Mono and Moonlight.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This strongly worded page at Boycott Novell features copious links to support the above characterization.So I follow the link in TFS .
And ? I see a barely coherent rant about " evil enemies of Linux " infiltrating W3C - a bunch of links to that effect , but none to do specifically with Jeff - followed by the part that actually mentions him as the new " evil guy " on the block .
The specific quote is " He was chosen despite his love for software patents " , followed by 3 links .
Of those , only two are actually unique ( # 2 and # 3 are the same link ) .
I reproduce them here , in order , for convenience : http : //boycottnovell.com/2009/02/21/mono-moonlight-novl-strategy/ [ boycottnovell.com ] http : //boycottnovell.com/2010/01/31/jeff-jaffe-and-zonker-quit/ [ boycottnovell.com ] Now , here 's the thing .
Neither one of those even contains the word " patent " anywhere , much less in any citations ! Apparently - judging by the first of those links - the sole reason why they even speak of his " love of software patents " is because he dares to promote Mono and Moonlight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> This strongly worded page at Boycott Novell features copious links to support the above characterization.So I follow the link in TFS.
And? I see a barely coherent rant about "evil enemies of Linux" infiltrating W3C - a bunch of links to that effect, but none to do specifically with Jeff - followed by the part that actually mentions him as the new "evil guy" on the block.
The specific quote is "He was chosen despite his love for software patents", followed by 3 links.
Of those, only two are actually unique (#2 and #3 are the same link).
I reproduce them here, in order, for convenience:http://boycottnovell.com/2009/02/21/mono-moonlight-novl-strategy/ [boycottnovell.com]http://boycottnovell.com/2010/01/31/jeff-jaffe-and-zonker-quit/ [boycottnovell.com]Now, here's the thing.
Neither one of those even contains the word "patent" anywhere, much less in any citations!Apparently - judging by the first of those links - the sole reason why they even speak of his "love of software patents" is because he dares to promote Mono and Moonlight.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422254</id>
	<title>Re:How about?</title>
	<author>Darkness404</author>
	<datestamp>1268148300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Generally, the W3C though seems to attempt to manipulate HTML for artificial means. Rather than the sane thing that most languages (both real and constructed) do and that is adapt to what the speakers/writers do, they simply say that they can do things a roundabout way rather than simply adapting the language. For example, the "font" element, "blink" and "marquee" which although very much used (especially during the early web) they were reluctant to actually do anything with what the writers wanted. <br> <br>

And yes, I was a web developer for a while, and still do some maintaining of sites. Nothing fancier though than some HTML, CSS and a very little bit of JavaScript.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Generally , the W3C though seems to attempt to manipulate HTML for artificial means .
Rather than the sane thing that most languages ( both real and constructed ) do and that is adapt to what the speakers/writers do , they simply say that they can do things a roundabout way rather than simply adapting the language .
For example , the " font " element , " blink " and " marquee " which although very much used ( especially during the early web ) they were reluctant to actually do anything with what the writers wanted .
And yes , I was a web developer for a while , and still do some maintaining of sites .
Nothing fancier though than some HTML , CSS and a very little bit of JavaScript .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Generally, the W3C though seems to attempt to manipulate HTML for artificial means.
Rather than the sane thing that most languages (both real and constructed) do and that is adapt to what the speakers/writers do, they simply say that they can do things a roundabout way rather than simply adapting the language.
For example, the "font" element, "blink" and "marquee" which although very much used (especially during the early web) they were reluctant to actually do anything with what the writers wanted.
And yes, I was a web developer for a while, and still do some maintaining of sites.
Nothing fancier though than some HTML, CSS and a very little bit of JavaScript.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421492</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422308</id>
	<title>Re:Mixed Feelings</title>
	<author>cheesybagel</author>
	<datestamp>1268149080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Oh dear. Not OOXML again.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Oh dear .
Not OOXML again .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Oh dear.
Not OOXML again.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31427860</id>
	<title>I have a bad feeling</title>
	<author>paxcoder</author>
	<datestamp>1268244120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>that HTML5 won't be a substitute for Silverlight.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>that HTML5 wo n't be a substitute for Silverlight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>that HTML5 won't be a substitute for Silverlight.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421322</id>
	<title>ISO.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1268140500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>2 bad.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>2 bad .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>2 bad.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420668</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422156</id>
	<title>Re:How about?</title>
	<author>Phil06</author>
	<datestamp>1268147100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Apparently, it is not possible to promote free software without bashing commercial software.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Apparently , it is not possible to promote free software without bashing commercial software .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apparently, it is not possible to promote free software without bashing commercial software.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421162</id>
	<title>Who's next?</title>
	<author>Dracos</author>
	<datestamp>1268139300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>First we get Chris Wilson as the chair of the HTML working group, and now Jeff Jaffe as W3C CEO.  Tim Berners-Lee is now going to focus on HTML5?  He could have focused on XHTML2 and we'd have ended up with a better standard.</p><p>How many not-necessarily-desirable people are going to infiltrate the W3C before it becomes completely useless?</p><p>One more reason why W3C needs to be absorbed into a body that can stick to its mission.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>First we get Chris Wilson as the chair of the HTML working group , and now Jeff Jaffe as W3C CEO .
Tim Berners-Lee is now going to focus on HTML5 ?
He could have focused on XHTML2 and we 'd have ended up with a better standard.How many not-necessarily-desirable people are going to infiltrate the W3C before it becomes completely useless ? One more reason why W3C needs to be absorbed into a body that can stick to its mission .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>First we get Chris Wilson as the chair of the HTML working group, and now Jeff Jaffe as W3C CEO.
Tim Berners-Lee is now going to focus on HTML5?
He could have focused on XHTML2 and we'd have ended up with a better standard.How many not-necessarily-desirable people are going to infiltrate the W3C before it becomes completely useless?One more reason why W3C needs to be absorbed into a body that can stick to its mission.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422156
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421314
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31426390
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31424140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420874
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422308
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31430488
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31424140
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421272
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423556
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423910
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422298
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420762
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421322
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421012
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423628
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420742
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423770
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420668
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421492
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421058
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421466
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421018
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420898
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420782
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421578
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422750
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_09_2159245_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421746
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420792
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31424140
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31426390
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31430488
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422750
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421492
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423750
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421746
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422156
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420706
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420898
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421058
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421018
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423910
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421520
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420876
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420794
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421578
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423556
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421012
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420874
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421314
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421048
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420762
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422298
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420742
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423628
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420594
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421466
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420782
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421272
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422308
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420668
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31423770
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421322
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31420744
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421384
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31421196
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_09_2159245.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_09_2159245.31422300
</commentlist>
</conversation>
