<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_03_27_050221</id>
	<title>Microsoft Adopts SVG For Internet Explorer 9</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1269715680000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>An anonymous reader writes <i>"<a href="http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/">SVG</a> has been a published standard for almost a decade.  Microsoft has had nothing to do with it, even while every other major browser adopted SVG as a supported format and interface.  Just in the last few weeks, though, Microsoft has <a href="http://www.itworld.com/development/102422/microsoft-supports-svg">thrown a surprising amount of its weight behind SVG</a>."</i> This means for IE 9, but it's a start.</htmltext>
<tokenext>An anonymous reader writes " SVG has been a published standard for almost a decade .
Microsoft has had nothing to do with it , even while every other major browser adopted SVG as a supported format and interface .
Just in the last few weeks , though , Microsoft has thrown a surprising amount of its weight behind SVG .
" This means for IE 9 , but it 's a start .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>An anonymous reader writes "SVG has been a published standard for almost a decade.
Microsoft has had nothing to do with it, even while every other major browser adopted SVG as a supported format and interface.
Just in the last few weeks, though, Microsoft has thrown a surprising amount of its weight behind SVG.
" This means for IE 9, but it's a start.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637668</id>
	<title>What a Coincidence</title>
	<author>randallman</author>
	<datestamp>1269681000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There appears to be an inverse relationship between IE market share and its implementation of standards.  Applaud MS for good decisions, but never forget how they acted when they owned the market.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There appears to be an inverse relationship between IE market share and its implementation of standards .
Applaud MS for good decisions , but never forget how they acted when they owned the market .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There appears to be an inverse relationship between IE market share and its implementation of standards.
Applaud MS for good decisions, but never forget how they acted when they owned the market.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637900</id>
	<title>embrace, extend, extinguish...</title>
	<author>advocate\_one</author>
	<datestamp>1269685380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>it's their only business model... SVG is the new target to pervert. Expect their web development tools to produce subtly broken SVG that only renders correctly on the IE version... they did the exact same with html. They will go to great lengths to ensure their development tools produce websites that don't work right on other browsers. Ever such subtle glitches, but the users will end up blaming the other browser that they picked on the ballot page.</htmltext>
<tokenext>it 's their only business model... SVG is the new target to pervert .
Expect their web development tools to produce subtly broken SVG that only renders correctly on the IE version... they did the exact same with html .
They will go to great lengths to ensure their development tools produce websites that do n't work right on other browsers .
Ever such subtle glitches , but the users will end up blaming the other browser that they picked on the ballot page .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it's their only business model... SVG is the new target to pervert.
Expect their web development tools to produce subtly broken SVG that only renders correctly on the IE version... they did the exact same with html.
They will go to great lengths to ensure their development tools produce websites that don't work right on other browsers.
Ever such subtle glitches, but the users will end up blaming the other browser that they picked on the ballot page.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637644</id>
	<title>WHY are everybody talking about svg in browsers ?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269680700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Every time somone mentiones this I go to adobe and try the svg test... and I can't se anything except "Missing Plugin".<br>What's the trick ???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Every time somone mentiones this I go to adobe and try the svg test... and I ca n't se anything except " Missing Plugin " .What 's the trick ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Every time somone mentiones this I go to adobe and try the svg test... and I can't se anything except "Missing Plugin".What's the trick ??
?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638852</id>
	<title>Just another tactic</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269699060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Just another tactic. First they "adopt" a known standard. Then they "tweak" it slightly, possibly requiring people to download the "extensions" - without of course making it easy for any one else to use these extensions (and of course, these tweaks are completely backwards incompatible - just enough to not make it work for anything else but their own platform). Then they try to sell it under a new fancy marketing name. Then more people start using it - they are convinced at this stage that Microsoft invented the technology to begin with. Then everyone starts say "well, look Micrsoft did this and this. Why can't  do this and this?"... Then they try to claw their market hold back..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Just another tactic .
First they " adopt " a known standard .
Then they " tweak " it slightly , possibly requiring people to download the " extensions " - without of course making it easy for any one else to use these extensions ( and of course , these tweaks are completely backwards incompatible - just enough to not make it work for anything else but their own platform ) .
Then they try to sell it under a new fancy marketing name .
Then more people start using it - they are convinced at this stage that Microsoft invented the technology to begin with .
Then everyone starts say " well , look Micrsoft did this and this .
Why ca n't do this and this ? " .. .
Then they try to claw their market hold back. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Just another tactic.
First they "adopt" a known standard.
Then they "tweak" it slightly, possibly requiring people to download the "extensions" - without of course making it easy for any one else to use these extensions (and of course, these tweaks are completely backwards incompatible - just enough to not make it work for anything else but their own platform).
Then they try to sell it under a new fancy marketing name.
Then more people start using it - they are convinced at this stage that Microsoft invented the technology to begin with.
Then everyone starts say "well, look Micrsoft did this and this.
Why can't  do this and this?"...
Then they try to claw their market hold back..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637756</id>
	<title>Too Slow</title>
	<author>davidjgraph</author>
	<datestamp>1269682260000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>C'on guys, you're way behind. Just like it took you ages to report IE supported HTML. Oh wait....</htmltext>
<tokenext>C'on guys , you 're way behind .
Just like it took you ages to report IE supported HTML .
Oh wait... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>C'on guys, you're way behind.
Just like it took you ages to report IE supported HTML.
Oh wait....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637852</id>
	<title>On Hugs, Stilts, and Water</title>
	<author>cffrost</author>
	<datestamp>1269684300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Shouldn't the headline read "Microsoft embraces SVG for Internet Exploder 9?"</htmltext>
<tokenext>Should n't the headline read " Microsoft embraces SVG for Internet Exploder 9 ?
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shouldn't the headline read "Microsoft embraces SVG for Internet Exploder 9?
"</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637400</id>
	<title>Nothing new</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1269633000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It's just more mulling over the recently released IE9 preview, which went through the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. torture rack pretty much as soon as it was announced. SVG support was already there, and was discussed alongside all the other newly supported standards, so what's the point of TFS?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's just more mulling over the recently released IE9 preview , which went through the / .
torture rack pretty much as soon as it was announced .
SVG support was already there , and was discussed alongside all the other newly supported standards , so what 's the point of TFS ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's just more mulling over the recently released IE9 preview, which went through the /.
torture rack pretty much as soon as it was announced.
SVG support was already there, and was discussed alongside all the other newly supported standards, so what's the point of TFS?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637806</id>
	<title>They probably just adopted it...</title>
	<author>Jane Q. Public</author>
	<datestamp>1269683400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>because they probably just now noticed it existed.
<br> <br>
Just kidding, but Microsoft <b>has been</b> pretty insular... it seems most of the time they would rather contemplate their own navel than check to see what anybody else is doing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>because they probably just now noticed it existed .
Just kidding , but Microsoft has been pretty insular... it seems most of the time they would rather contemplate their own navel than check to see what anybody else is doing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>because they probably just now noticed it existed.
Just kidding, but Microsoft has been pretty insular... it seems most of the time they would rather contemplate their own navel than check to see what anybody else is doing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637512</id>
	<title>anybody got an N280 Atom?</title>
	<author>Blue Shifted</author>
	<datestamp>1269721320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>please post your java scimark score!  we really need some scores for the N280, and amd's L110, thank you.</p><p><a href="http://math.nist.gov/scimark2/run.html" title="nist.gov" rel="nofollow">http://math.nist.gov/scimark2/run.html</a> [nist.gov]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>please post your java scimark score !
we really need some scores for the N280 , and amd 's L110 , thank you.http : //math.nist.gov/scimark2/run.html [ nist.gov ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>please post your java scimark score!
we really need some scores for the N280, and amd's L110, thank you.http://math.nist.gov/scimark2/run.html [nist.gov]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638880</id>
	<title>Re:WHY are everybody talking about svg in browsers</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1269699360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The trick is to visit a site that uses SVG correctly, instead of invoking the plugin explicitly.  Try something like one of the <a href="http://www.w3schools.com/svg/tryit.asp?filename=animatemotion\_2&amp;type=svg" title="w3schools.com">w3schools examples</a> [w3schools.com] or <a href="http://tutorials.jenkov.com/svg/svg-examples.html" title="jenkov.com">others</a> [jenkov.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>The trick is to visit a site that uses SVG correctly , instead of invoking the plugin explicitly .
Try something like one of the w3schools examples [ w3schools.com ] or others [ jenkov.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The trick is to visit a site that uses SVG correctly, instead of invoking the plugin explicitly.
Try something like one of the w3schools examples [w3schools.com] or others [jenkov.com].</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31641984</id>
	<title>Re:They probably just adopted it...</title>
	<author>nyctopterus</author>
	<datestamp>1269722580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Actually IE5 for mac had SVG support back in... 2001? Also full PNG support. Best browser Microsoft ever made.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually IE5 for mac had SVG support back in... 2001 ? Also full PNG support .
Best browser Microsoft ever made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually IE5 for mac had SVG support back in... 2001? Also full PNG support.
Best browser Microsoft ever made.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637806</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638874</id>
	<title>SpoNge</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269699300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><A HREF="http://goat.cx/" title="goat.cx" rel="nofollow">play] area Try not decen7ralized</a> [goat.cx]</htmltext>
<tokenext>play ] area Try not decen7ralized [ goat.cx ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>play] area Try not decen7ralized [goat.cx]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31640282</id>
	<title>Dear Microsoft:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269711000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>C-A-N-V-A-S.</p><p>Thanks.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>C-A-N-V-A-S.Thanks .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>C-A-N-V-A-S.Thanks.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31643982</id>
	<title>Not in IE8</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269698040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wait... what? They didn't even have that in IE 8?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wait... what ? They did n't even have that in IE 8 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wait... what? They didn't even have that in IE 8?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638986</id>
	<title>Imagine the bandwidth that was wasted</title>
	<author>paxcoder</author>
	<datestamp>1269700200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Imagine all those gradients and rounded corners - how they wasted so much pre-video bandwidth. Imagine the speed at which those pages could've loaded over a 56 kbps connection. All because Microsoft had monopoly on de-facto "standards" and is abusing it. Well we don't need you anymore, dying old browser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Imagine all those gradients and rounded corners - how they wasted so much pre-video bandwidth .
Imagine the speed at which those pages could 've loaded over a 56 kbps connection .
All because Microsoft had monopoly on de-facto " standards " and is abusing it .
Well we do n't need you anymore , dying old browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Imagine all those gradients and rounded corners - how they wasted so much pre-video bandwidth.
Imagine the speed at which those pages could've loaded over a 56 kbps connection.
All because Microsoft had monopoly on de-facto "standards" and is abusing it.
Well we don't need you anymore, dying old browser.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637632</id>
	<title>Extinguish?</title>
	<author>flyingfsck</author>
	<datestamp>1269680460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I guess they now want to change the standard to accommodate their bugs.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I guess they now want to change the standard to accommodate their bugs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I guess they now want to change the standard to accommodate their bugs.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31640992</id>
	<title>Why the effort?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269715380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why do they even bother?  Why not just buy Opera or use Webkit or something?  Developing further on IE seems like an awful lot of work...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do they even bother ?
Why not just buy Opera or use Webkit or something ?
Developing further on IE seems like an awful lot of work.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do they even bother?
Why not just buy Opera or use Webkit or something?
Developing further on IE seems like an awful lot of work...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637694</id>
	<title>Earth hour? Useless, it shall be IE HOUR!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269681420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Earth hour? Useless! This day shall be known as IE HOUR! Everybody <em>starts</em> their IE's around UTC+0 12:00!

</p><p>On a more serious note, why don't they do these real improvements in small increments, so that these would appear to IE8 too, but faster.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Earth hour ?
Useless ! This day shall be known as IE HOUR !
Everybody starts their IE 's around UTC + 0 12 : 00 !
On a more serious note , why do n't they do these real improvements in small increments , so that these would appear to IE8 too , but faster .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Earth hour?
Useless! This day shall be known as IE HOUR!
Everybody starts their IE's around UTC+0 12:00!
On a more serious note, why don't they do these real improvements in small increments, so that these would appear to IE8 too, but faster.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638784</id>
	<title>Re:WHY are everybody talking about svg in browsers</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269698340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Look... behind your ear!! Could that be a plugin???</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Look... behind your ear ! !
Could that be a plugin ? ?
?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Look... behind your ear!!
Could that be a plugin??
?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638752</id>
	<title>Re:The problem of MS:</title>
	<author>jollyreaper</author>
	<datestamp>1269698040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Browsing is also mobile browsing nowadays. Microsoft has not the capability any more to impose technologies (Silverlight etc.) on users any more. If 50\% of the devices dont support your webpage and never will, you can not ignore any mor anybody who can not install some plugin. Morover IE is also loosing foothold on the desktop. So what was a move to hinder a competitor seriously (Why should i embed SVG on webpage if IE can not view it?) is slowly becoming a disadvantage. If Firefox and google chrome get the image of "just working fine" when compared to the IE and IE gets the image of causing problems, then they can stop making IE9.</p></div><p>The mobile space really is exploding. Smart phones were fairly useless for the longest time but the tech has really matured. They're very useful machines. And with the prevalence of non-Windows netbooks, there's more and more pressure for true interoperability.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Browsing is also mobile browsing nowadays .
Microsoft has not the capability any more to impose technologies ( Silverlight etc .
) on users any more .
If 50 \ % of the devices dont support your webpage and never will , you can not ignore any mor anybody who can not install some plugin .
Morover IE is also loosing foothold on the desktop .
So what was a move to hinder a competitor seriously ( Why should i embed SVG on webpage if IE can not view it ?
) is slowly becoming a disadvantage .
If Firefox and google chrome get the image of " just working fine " when compared to the IE and IE gets the image of causing problems , then they can stop making IE9.The mobile space really is exploding .
Smart phones were fairly useless for the longest time but the tech has really matured .
They 're very useful machines .
And with the prevalence of non-Windows netbooks , there 's more and more pressure for true interoperability .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Browsing is also mobile browsing nowadays.
Microsoft has not the capability any more to impose technologies (Silverlight etc.
) on users any more.
If 50\% of the devices dont support your webpage and never will, you can not ignore any mor anybody who can not install some plugin.
Morover IE is also loosing foothold on the desktop.
So what was a move to hinder a competitor seriously (Why should i embed SVG on webpage if IE can not view it?
) is slowly becoming a disadvantage.
If Firefox and google chrome get the image of "just working fine" when compared to the IE and IE gets the image of causing problems, then they can stop making IE9.The mobile space really is exploding.
Smart phones were fairly useless for the longest time but the tech has really matured.
They're very useful machines.
And with the prevalence of non-Windows netbooks, there's more and more pressure for true interoperability.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637638</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637472</id>
	<title>Pull Factor</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269720600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Always need those "teaser features" to act as a pull factor when making software that doesn't support older platforms.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Always need those " teaser features " to act as a pull factor when making software that does n't support older platforms .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Always need those "teaser features" to act as a pull factor when making software that doesn't support older platforms.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637994</id>
	<title>Hardly news...</title>
	<author>ewrong</author>
	<datestamp>1269687180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This was announced on the 16th of March:</p><p> <a href="http://live.visitmix.com/MIX10/Sessions/KEY02" title="visitmix.com" rel="nofollow">http://live.visitmix.com/MIX10/Sessions/KEY02</a> [visitmix.com] </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This was announced on the 16th of March : http : //live.visitmix.com/MIX10/Sessions/KEY02 [ visitmix.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This was announced on the 16th of March: http://live.visitmix.com/MIX10/Sessions/KEY02 [visitmix.com] </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638566</id>
	<title>Favorite SVG demos or cryptic '??? Cameron Laird'?</title>
	<author>D4C5CE</author>
	<datestamp>1269695520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Regrettably a broken page mysteriosly named "??? Cameron Laird" is all I get to see on Firefox 3.6 when following the link from <a href="http://www.itworld.com/development/102422/microsoft-supports-svg" title="itworld.com">TFA</a> [itworld.com] which says<blockquote><div><p>starting to collect my favorite public demos <a href="http://phaseit.net/claird/comp.text.xml/SVG.html#demos" title="phaseit.net">here</a> [phaseit.net]</p></div> </blockquote></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Regrettably a broken page mysteriosly named " ? ? ?
Cameron Laird " is all I get to see on Firefox 3.6 when following the link from TFA [ itworld.com ] which saysstarting to collect my favorite public demos here [ phaseit.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Regrettably a broken page mysteriosly named "???
Cameron Laird" is all I get to see on Firefox 3.6 when following the link from TFA [itworld.com] which saysstarting to collect my favorite public demos here [phaseit.net] 
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31652172</id>
	<title>Re:Frist Prost</title>
	<author>Meski</author>
	<datestamp>1269785820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Any relation to Marcel?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Any relation to Marcel ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Any relation to Marcel?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637398</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637928</id>
	<title>SVG Open in Paris this year</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269685920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I hope the conference fits my schedule: <a href="http://svgopen.org/" title="svgopen.org" rel="nofollow">http://svgopen.org/</a> [svgopen.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I hope the conference fits my schedule : http : //svgopen.org/ [ svgopen.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I hope the conference fits my schedule: http://svgopen.org/ [svgopen.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637480</id>
	<title>and web developers breathe another sigh of relief</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269720780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>this follows on the earlier announcement to support more HTML5 features on IE9. after killing netscape, IE has managed to thwart other upcoming browsers by tweaking standards in a way that developers specifically for IE and other standard compatible browser's rendering looked bad. now this was a fine business strategy except that the browser just refused to evolve. firefox happened followed by safari, chrome, etc. heck, even opera is getting more attention now, especially with euro mandated browser raffle for windows. now IE strategy of not following standards is stacking up against it, with some markets have IE share dropped to less that 50. it is trying to catch up now and actually have the audacity to suggest that they are doing a better job of following the standards, a case in point the adoption of long desired css border-radius.

anyway, developers are 1 step closer to worry less about cross browser compatibility (cbc) and more about design and development</htmltext>
<tokenext>this follows on the earlier announcement to support more HTML5 features on IE9 .
after killing netscape , IE has managed to thwart other upcoming browsers by tweaking standards in a way that developers specifically for IE and other standard compatible browser 's rendering looked bad .
now this was a fine business strategy except that the browser just refused to evolve .
firefox happened followed by safari , chrome , etc .
heck , even opera is getting more attention now , especially with euro mandated browser raffle for windows .
now IE strategy of not following standards is stacking up against it , with some markets have IE share dropped to less that 50. it is trying to catch up now and actually have the audacity to suggest that they are doing a better job of following the standards , a case in point the adoption of long desired css border-radius .
anyway , developers are 1 step closer to worry less about cross browser compatibility ( cbc ) and more about design and development</tokentext>
<sentencetext>this follows on the earlier announcement to support more HTML5 features on IE9.
after killing netscape, IE has managed to thwart other upcoming browsers by tweaking standards in a way that developers specifically for IE and other standard compatible browser's rendering looked bad.
now this was a fine business strategy except that the browser just refused to evolve.
firefox happened followed by safari, chrome, etc.
heck, even opera is getting more attention now, especially with euro mandated browser raffle for windows.
now IE strategy of not following standards is stacking up against it, with some markets have IE share dropped to less that 50. it is trying to catch up now and actually have the audacity to suggest that they are doing a better job of following the standards, a case in point the adoption of long desired css border-radius.
anyway, developers are 1 step closer to worry less about cross browser compatibility (cbc) and more about design and development</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31640902</id>
	<title>world SVG conference sponsored by Microsoft</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269714660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Last year SVG Open was organised at Google HQ and sponsored by Microsoft (among others)<br>This year the conference is in Paris, where Microsoft will probably sponsor too.<br>More via http://svgopen.org</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Last year SVG Open was organised at Google HQ and sponsored by Microsoft ( among others ) This year the conference is in Paris , where Microsoft will probably sponsor too.More via http : //svgopen.org</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Last year SVG Open was organised at Google HQ and sponsored by Microsoft (among others)This year the conference is in Paris, where Microsoft will probably sponsor too.More via http://svgopen.org</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31642538</id>
	<title>Step one: Done.</title>
	<author>Hurricane78</author>
	<datestamp>1269683760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Next: Step two: Extend.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Next : Step two : Extend .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Next: Step two: Extend.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637398</id>
	<title>Frist Prost</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269632940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Offtopic</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Frist Prost</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Frist Prost</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Frist Prost</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637774</id>
	<title>Awesome!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269682500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At this rate, IE 14 might actually be worth using!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At this rate , IE 14 might actually be worth using !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At this rate, IE 14 might actually be worth using!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637470</id>
	<title>Re:Well, that's a surprise.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269720480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Ironic.</p><p>"Well, that's a surprise.  A SlashDot neckbeard doesn't trust Microsoft."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Ironic .
" Well , that 's a surprise .
A SlashDot neckbeard does n't trust Microsoft .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ironic.
"Well, that's a surprise.
A SlashDot neckbeard doesn't trust Microsoft.
"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637406</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637406</id>
	<title>Well, that's a surprise.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269633000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I commend the decision, but I don't trust them.</p><p>-jcr</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I commend the decision , but I do n't trust them.-jcr</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I commend the decision, but I don't trust them.-jcr</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637814</id>
	<title>Re:What a Coincidence</title>
	<author>fm6</author>
	<datestamp>1269683640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Loss of market share is certainly a factor in this. But not the only one.</p><p>One big factor is all the legal and political pressure to play nice with others. One result is that browser choice screen that EU customers get. Another is the fact that they've given no preference to their new free antivirus software; not so long ago, they would have just added it to the Windows install and ignored the complaints.</p><p>But I think the biggest change is a cultural shift among all software people. Engineers use to be a lot more arrogant about the superiority of their own favorite way of doing things. MS was particularly bad this way, but the problem was industry-wide. The whole Microsoft-Sun legal tsuris over Java late 90s happened mainly because people in both companies had strong opinions as to what features the language needed and total contempt for other people's opinions on the same issue. Now it's all about MS-Sun (Oracle?) cooperation, even to the point of selling servers with Windows pre-installed.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Loss of market share is certainly a factor in this .
But not the only one.One big factor is all the legal and political pressure to play nice with others .
One result is that browser choice screen that EU customers get .
Another is the fact that they 've given no preference to their new free antivirus software ; not so long ago , they would have just added it to the Windows install and ignored the complaints.But I think the biggest change is a cultural shift among all software people .
Engineers use to be a lot more arrogant about the superiority of their own favorite way of doing things .
MS was particularly bad this way , but the problem was industry-wide .
The whole Microsoft-Sun legal tsuris over Java late 90s happened mainly because people in both companies had strong opinions as to what features the language needed and total contempt for other people 's opinions on the same issue .
Now it 's all about MS-Sun ( Oracle ?
) cooperation , even to the point of selling servers with Windows pre-installed .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Loss of market share is certainly a factor in this.
But not the only one.One big factor is all the legal and political pressure to play nice with others.
One result is that browser choice screen that EU customers get.
Another is the fact that they've given no preference to their new free antivirus software; not so long ago, they would have just added it to the Windows install and ignored the complaints.But I think the biggest change is a cultural shift among all software people.
Engineers use to be a lot more arrogant about the superiority of their own favorite way of doing things.
MS was particularly bad this way, but the problem was industry-wide.
The whole Microsoft-Sun legal tsuris over Java late 90s happened mainly because people in both companies had strong opinions as to what features the language needed and total contempt for other people's opinions on the same issue.
Now it's all about MS-Sun (Oracle?
) cooperation, even to the point of selling servers with Windows pre-installed.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637668</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637638</id>
	<title>The problem of MS:</title>
	<author>drolli</author>
	<datestamp>1269680580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Browsing is also mobile browsing nowadays. Microsoft has not the capability any more to impose technologies (Silverlight etc.) on users any more. If 50\% of the devices dont support your webpage and never will, you can not ignore any mor anybody who can not install some plugin. Morover IE is also loosing foothold on the desktop. So what was a move to hinder a competitor seriously (Why should i embed SVG on webpage if IE can not view it?) is slowly becoming a disadvantage. If Firefox and google chrome get the image of "just working fine" when compared to the IE and IE gets the image of causing problems, then they can stop making IE9.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Browsing is also mobile browsing nowadays .
Microsoft has not the capability any more to impose technologies ( Silverlight etc .
) on users any more .
If 50 \ % of the devices dont support your webpage and never will , you can not ignore any mor anybody who can not install some plugin .
Morover IE is also loosing foothold on the desktop .
So what was a move to hinder a competitor seriously ( Why should i embed SVG on webpage if IE can not view it ?
) is slowly becoming a disadvantage .
If Firefox and google chrome get the image of " just working fine " when compared to the IE and IE gets the image of causing problems , then they can stop making IE9 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Browsing is also mobile browsing nowadays.
Microsoft has not the capability any more to impose technologies (Silverlight etc.
) on users any more.
If 50\% of the devices dont support your webpage and never will, you can not ignore any mor anybody who can not install some plugin.
Morover IE is also loosing foothold on the desktop.
So what was a move to hinder a competitor seriously (Why should i embed SVG on webpage if IE can not view it?
) is slowly becoming a disadvantage.
If Firefox and google chrome get the image of "just working fine" when compared to the IE and IE gets the image of causing problems, then they can stop making IE9.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638968</id>
	<title>Re:What a Coincidence</title>
	<author>Eskarel</author>
	<datestamp>1269700140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The problem with standards is that they're generally designed more by the losers than by the winners.</p><p>The argument could be made that, given that at the time they were being devised IE had almost 90\% of the market share, that at least some of the IE way ought to have been the standard. After all, Netscape was as guilty of changing and polluting the web standards as anyone else back in those days.</p><p>While there are certainly some things in IE which are just strange(the way it handles the z-axis for instance isn't even internally consistent) and stuff like ActiveX should never be included into a standard, there's no real reason why the W3C box model is superior to the model used by IE. Nor is there anything particularly wrong with some of the Microsoft only javascript methods, aside from the fact that they aren't used by everyone.</p><p>While none of this excuses the fact that IE6 remained the latest version of IE for the better part of 10 years, especially a 10 years which saw leaps and bounds in the development of the web as a medium, it does at least somewhat excuse the fact that IE6 wasn't standards compliant to begin with.</p><p>Microsoft's sins with internet explorer are more that they let the application rot, than the fact that IE6 was implemented the way that it was.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The problem with standards is that they 're generally designed more by the losers than by the winners.The argument could be made that , given that at the time they were being devised IE had almost 90 \ % of the market share , that at least some of the IE way ought to have been the standard .
After all , Netscape was as guilty of changing and polluting the web standards as anyone else back in those days.While there are certainly some things in IE which are just strange ( the way it handles the z-axis for instance is n't even internally consistent ) and stuff like ActiveX should never be included into a standard , there 's no real reason why the W3C box model is superior to the model used by IE .
Nor is there anything particularly wrong with some of the Microsoft only javascript methods , aside from the fact that they are n't used by everyone.While none of this excuses the fact that IE6 remained the latest version of IE for the better part of 10 years , especially a 10 years which saw leaps and bounds in the development of the web as a medium , it does at least somewhat excuse the fact that IE6 was n't standards compliant to begin with.Microsoft 's sins with internet explorer are more that they let the application rot , than the fact that IE6 was implemented the way that it was .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The problem with standards is that they're generally designed more by the losers than by the winners.The argument could be made that, given that at the time they were being devised IE had almost 90\% of the market share, that at least some of the IE way ought to have been the standard.
After all, Netscape was as guilty of changing and polluting the web standards as anyone else back in those days.While there are certainly some things in IE which are just strange(the way it handles the z-axis for instance isn't even internally consistent) and stuff like ActiveX should never be included into a standard, there's no real reason why the W3C box model is superior to the model used by IE.
Nor is there anything particularly wrong with some of the Microsoft only javascript methods, aside from the fact that they aren't used by everyone.While none of this excuses the fact that IE6 remained the latest version of IE for the better part of 10 years, especially a 10 years which saw leaps and bounds in the development of the web as a medium, it does at least somewhat excuse the fact that IE6 wasn't standards compliant to begin with.Microsoft's sins with internet explorer are more that they let the application rot, than the fact that IE6 was implemented the way that it was.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637668</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31639196</id>
	<title>Security risks and standards</title>
	<author>dremspider</author>
	<datestamp>1269702960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Microsoft is putting their customers at risk every time they half ass these standards like they love to do.  Companies spend a lot of time and money to develop these lovely web apps that only work for IE version X, then find out that because IE X+1 is trying to finally conform to standards their current app is broken.  Whether we like to admit it or not, IE is getting better at security issues, but many of their customers can't upgrade b/c they built the POS that is IE 6.  I have seen this again and again in organizations.  No one wants to upgrade because application Y breaks when you upgrade so everyone stays with the more vulnerable IE 6.  Microsoft needs to stop putting it's customers at rish in the name of vendor lock in.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Microsoft is putting their customers at risk every time they half ass these standards like they love to do .
Companies spend a lot of time and money to develop these lovely web apps that only work for IE version X , then find out that because IE X + 1 is trying to finally conform to standards their current app is broken .
Whether we like to admit it or not , IE is getting better at security issues , but many of their customers ca n't upgrade b/c they built the POS that is IE 6 .
I have seen this again and again in organizations .
No one wants to upgrade because application Y breaks when you upgrade so everyone stays with the more vulnerable IE 6 .
Microsoft needs to stop putting it 's customers at rish in the name of vendor lock in .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Microsoft is putting their customers at risk every time they half ass these standards like they love to do.
Companies spend a lot of time and money to develop these lovely web apps that only work for IE version X, then find out that because IE X+1 is trying to finally conform to standards their current app is broken.
Whether we like to admit it or not, IE is getting better at security issues, but many of their customers can't upgrade b/c they built the POS that is IE 6.
I have seen this again and again in organizations.
No one wants to upgrade because application Y breaks when you upgrade so everyone stays with the more vulnerable IE 6.
Microsoft needs to stop putting it's customers at rish in the name of vendor lock in.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31643650</id>
	<title>Re:What a Coincidence</title>
	<author>marcosdumay</author>
	<datestamp>1269694320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That was caused by losing some market share, rest assured, but the change is a bit deeper than that. Just ask yourself what Microsoft gains publishing IE. The answer used to be that they wated to stop the Web from developing, but now that they are losing market share they aren't able to do that anymore. So why launch a new version?</p><p>IE is now the prefered front-end of all Microsoft web services (the ones for the cloud and the ones for the LAN), owning the front end gives them the oportunity to make a much better (if they do it right, of course) interface for those products. If Microsoft strategy is to explit IE that way, one'd expect them to make it a better browser, since they want people to use it, and want people to like the products they see on it more than the ones they see on the other ones.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That was caused by losing some market share , rest assured , but the change is a bit deeper than that .
Just ask yourself what Microsoft gains publishing IE .
The answer used to be that they wated to stop the Web from developing , but now that they are losing market share they are n't able to do that anymore .
So why launch a new version ? IE is now the prefered front-end of all Microsoft web services ( the ones for the cloud and the ones for the LAN ) , owning the front end gives them the oportunity to make a much better ( if they do it right , of course ) interface for those products .
If Microsoft strategy is to explit IE that way , one 'd expect them to make it a better browser , since they want people to use it , and want people to like the products they see on it more than the ones they see on the other ones .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That was caused by losing some market share, rest assured, but the change is a bit deeper than that.
Just ask yourself what Microsoft gains publishing IE.
The answer used to be that they wated to stop the Web from developing, but now that they are losing market share they aren't able to do that anymore.
So why launch a new version?IE is now the prefered front-end of all Microsoft web services (the ones for the cloud and the ones for the LAN), owning the front end gives them the oportunity to make a much better (if they do it right, of course) interface for those products.
If Microsoft strategy is to explit IE that way, one'd expect them to make it a better browser, since they want people to use it, and want people to like the products they see on it more than the ones they see on the other ones.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637668</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31639170</id>
	<title>Re:WHY are everybody talking about svg in browsers</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1269702420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Your browser might be picking the wrong mime type for SVG. I can't find the details, but I recall that an early Adobe tool established 'image/svg-xml' in the windows registry, and firefox will inherit that; changing it to 'image/svg+xml' should fix things (I suppose installing a later version of the Adobe SVG plugin should also do that, who knows).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Your browser might be picking the wrong mime type for SVG .
I ca n't find the details , but I recall that an early Adobe tool established 'image/svg-xml ' in the windows registry , and firefox will inherit that ; changing it to 'image/svg + xml ' should fix things ( I suppose installing a later version of the Adobe SVG plugin should also do that , who knows ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your browser might be picking the wrong mime type for SVG.
I can't find the details, but I recall that an early Adobe tool established 'image/svg-xml' in the windows registry, and firefox will inherit that; changing it to 'image/svg+xml' should fix things (I suppose installing a later version of the Adobe SVG plugin should also do that, who knows).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637644</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638462</id>
	<title>Strategic move microsoft</title>
	<author>Device666</author>
	<datestamp>1269693840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Flash has opposition now from two technologies, one is SVG and the other is Silverlight. The timing is very logical since Apple doesn't support flash on it's IPhone and Ipad. Microsoft first has to remove Flash from it's dominant position. If that plan would work out in the future Microsoft can always choose to drop SVG support and pushing forward it's Silverlight.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Flash has opposition now from two technologies , one is SVG and the other is Silverlight .
The timing is very logical since Apple does n't support flash on it 's IPhone and Ipad .
Microsoft first has to remove Flash from it 's dominant position .
If that plan would work out in the future Microsoft can always choose to drop SVG support and pushing forward it 's Silverlight .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Flash has opposition now from two technologies, one is SVG and the other is Silverlight.
The timing is very logical since Apple doesn't support flash on it's IPhone and Ipad.
Microsoft first has to remove Flash from it's dominant position.
If that plan would work out in the future Microsoft can always choose to drop SVG support and pushing forward it's Silverlight.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638634</id>
	<title>Re:embrace, extend, extinguish...</title>
	<author>harlows\_monkeys</author>
	<datestamp>1269696540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Go look at how HTML evolved, and which browsers supported which features, and you'll see that they didn't do anything the other browser makers weren't also doing. Grab older editions of, say, O'Reilly's HTML Definitive Guide, and you'll find a large chunk of the tags are marked as non-standard Netscape extensions, for instance.</p><p>The web got big on these non-standard tags. Many eventually became standard (although sometimes in not quite compatible ways). The big difference between IE and the others is that Microsoft, until recently, has been less willing to break sites (especially corporate intranet sites) that use the old stuff.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Go look at how HTML evolved , and which browsers supported which features , and you 'll see that they did n't do anything the other browser makers were n't also doing .
Grab older editions of , say , O'Reilly 's HTML Definitive Guide , and you 'll find a large chunk of the tags are marked as non-standard Netscape extensions , for instance.The web got big on these non-standard tags .
Many eventually became standard ( although sometimes in not quite compatible ways ) .
The big difference between IE and the others is that Microsoft , until recently , has been less willing to break sites ( especially corporate intranet sites ) that use the old stuff .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Go look at how HTML evolved, and which browsers supported which features, and you'll see that they didn't do anything the other browser makers weren't also doing.
Grab older editions of, say, O'Reilly's HTML Definitive Guide, and you'll find a large chunk of the tags are marked as non-standard Netscape extensions, for instance.The web got big on these non-standard tags.
Many eventually became standard (although sometimes in not quite compatible ways).
The big difference between IE and the others is that Microsoft, until recently, has been less willing to break sites (especially corporate intranet sites) that use the old stuff.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637900</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638516</id>
	<title>EEE once again....</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269694440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Recognize it for what it is, Embrace, Extend , Eliminate!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Recognize it for what it is , Embrace , Extend , Eliminate !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Recognize it for what it is, Embrace, Extend , Eliminate!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637622</id>
	<title>NT</title>
	<author>Antiocheian</author>
	<datestamp>1269680460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Redundant</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><b>N</b>ice <b>T</b>ry</p><p><i>Firefox. Up and Running.</i></p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Nice TryFirefox .
Up and Running .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Nice TryFirefox.
Up and Running.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637840</id>
	<title>Poor Microsoft</title>
	<author>fersure</author>
	<datestamp>1269684180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>They do try, bless their little cotton socks. :</htmltext>
<tokenext>They do try , bless their little cotton socks .
:</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They do try, bless their little cotton socks.
:</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31645104</id>
	<title>Re:and web developers breathe another sigh of reli</title>
	<author>MacDork</author>
	<datestamp>1269711120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Some markets?  Their worldwide browser share has plummeted to around 54\%.  <a href="http://gs.statcounter.com/" title="statcounter.com" rel="nofollow">http://gs.statcounter.com/</a> [statcounter.com]  I assume strongholds like Korea are IE for character set reasons, but they'll be less than 50\% worldwide in just a few more months.  The web stagnated for 10 years because of MS.  Now that they're losing their grip, they're back to play embrace, extend, extinguish once again.  This time they're not going to be able to crush some little one product company like Netscape though.  They're up against Google and Apple.  I hope those two stomp a mudhole in MS once and for all.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Some markets ?
Their worldwide browser share has plummeted to around 54 \ % .
http : //gs.statcounter.com/ [ statcounter.com ] I assume strongholds like Korea are IE for character set reasons , but they 'll be less than 50 \ % worldwide in just a few more months .
The web stagnated for 10 years because of MS. Now that they 're losing their grip , they 're back to play embrace , extend , extinguish once again .
This time they 're not going to be able to crush some little one product company like Netscape though .
They 're up against Google and Apple .
I hope those two stomp a mudhole in MS once and for all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some markets?
Their worldwide browser share has plummeted to around 54\%.
http://gs.statcounter.com/ [statcounter.com]  I assume strongholds like Korea are IE for character set reasons, but they'll be less than 50\% worldwide in just a few more months.
The web stagnated for 10 years because of MS.  Now that they're losing their grip, they're back to play embrace, extend, extinguish once again.
This time they're not going to be able to crush some little one product company like Netscape though.
They're up against Google and Apple.
I hope those two stomp a mudhole in MS once and for all.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637480</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638956</id>
	<title>"I'M AS MAD AS HELL"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269700020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!"</p><p>Or should I be grateful? Recently my team was not paid for its work because we didn't make a website available on IE6. Bug off, MS. Your browser should've died in the age of Netscape. And now, your company should also die.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" AND I 'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE !
" Or should I be grateful ?
Recently my team was not paid for its work because we did n't make a website available on IE6 .
Bug off , MS. Your browser should 've died in the age of Netscape .
And now , your company should also die .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!
"Or should I be grateful?
Recently my team was not paid for its work because we didn't make a website available on IE6.
Bug off, MS. Your browser should've died in the age of Netscape.
And now, your company should also die.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31644016</id>
	<title>Re:embrace, extend, extinguish...</title>
	<author>Onymous Coward</author>
	<datestamp>1269698340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"But <em>they</em> did it, too..." is never an excuse for misbehavior.</p><p>Anyone tuned in to what was going on in the early days knows that Netscape was behaving badly, too.  They don't get a free pass to be assholes either.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" But they did it , too... " is never an excuse for misbehavior.Anyone tuned in to what was going on in the early days knows that Netscape was behaving badly , too .
They do n't get a free pass to be assholes either .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"But they did it, too..." is never an excuse for misbehavior.Anyone tuned in to what was going on in the early days knows that Netscape was behaving badly, too.
They don't get a free pass to be assholes either.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638634</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31639722</id>
	<title>Re:The problem of MS:</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1269707280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think you've hit the nail on the head. If M$ can't use IE to lock users in to its products or to disadvantage its competitors, then it makes no sense for them to waste money on it. Just let the users use whichever browser they like and save the IE development costs.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think you 've hit the nail on the head .
If M $ ca n't use IE to lock users in to its products or to disadvantage its competitors , then it makes no sense for them to waste money on it .
Just let the users use whichever browser they like and save the IE development costs .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think you've hit the nail on the head.
If M$ can't use IE to lock users in to its products or to disadvantage its competitors, then it makes no sense for them to waste money on it.
Just let the users use whichever browser they like and save the IE development costs.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637638</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31652172
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637398
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31639722
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638752
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637638
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637470
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637406
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637814
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638968
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638784
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31639170
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31641984
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637806
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638880
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637644
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31645104
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637480
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31644016
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638634
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637900
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_03_27_050221_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31643650
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637668
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637644
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31639170
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638784
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638880
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637900
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638634
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31644016
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637806
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31641984
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637472
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637774
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637668
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638968
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31643650
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637814
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637398
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31652172
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637406
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637470
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637400
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638566
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637994
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638462
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637632
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637638
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31638752
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31639722
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31637480
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31645104
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_03_27_050221.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_03_27_050221.31640282
</commentlist>
</conversation>
