<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_06_03_159249</id>
	<title>First Beta of Opera 10 Released</title>
	<author>Soulskill</author>
	<datestamp>1244043960000</datestamp>
	<htmltext><a href="mailto:miladin@miladinoski.gmail@com" rel="nofollow">Miladinoski</a> writes <i>"Opera Software ASA today <a href="http://my.opera.com/community/blog/opera-10-beta-1">released the first beta</a> of their tenth version of the Opera browser. In addition to the browser's known features, like mouse gestures, keyboard shortcuts, voice navigation, mail and RSS support, speed dial and so forth, <a href="http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/">it now includes a Turbo mode</a> which unclogs your connection to get faster browsing, a new interface, a tabbed browsing update and customizable speed dial. Opera 10 continues to <a href="http://dev.opera.com/articles/view/standards-support-in-opera-10-beta/">follow the web standards</a> by getting 100/100 and pixel-perfect scores on the <a href="http://acid3.acidtests.org/">Acid3 test</a>. The beta is currently <a href="http://www.opera.com/browser/next/">available for every modern OS platform</a>."</i></htmltext>
<tokenext>Miladinoski writes " Opera Software ASA today released the first beta of their tenth version of the Opera browser .
In addition to the browser 's known features , like mouse gestures , keyboard shortcuts , voice navigation , mail and RSS support , speed dial and so forth , it now includes a Turbo mode which unclogs your connection to get faster browsing , a new interface , a tabbed browsing update and customizable speed dial .
Opera 10 continues to follow the web standards by getting 100/100 and pixel-perfect scores on the Acid3 test .
The beta is currently available for every modern OS platform .
"</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Miladinoski writes "Opera Software ASA today released the first beta of their tenth version of the Opera browser.
In addition to the browser's known features, like mouse gestures, keyboard shortcuts, voice navigation, mail and RSS support, speed dial and so forth, it now includes a Turbo mode which unclogs your connection to get faster browsing, a new interface, a tabbed browsing update and customizable speed dial.
Opera 10 continues to follow the web standards by getting 100/100 and pixel-perfect scores on the Acid3 test.
The beta is currently available for every modern OS platform.
"</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200517</id>
	<title>Opera Easter Egg type /. for slashdot.org</title>
	<author>locopuyo</author>
	<datestamp>1244020980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>just type<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. in the address bar<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>just type / .
in the address bar : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>just type /.
in the address bar :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206163</id>
	<title>Re:I really like Opera but</title>
	<author>s1lverl0rd</author>
	<datestamp>1244057280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>neither Chrome or IE8 work on Linux</p></div><p>I managed to compile the Chromium alpha all right on my standard Ubuntu machine by following the instructions on <a href="http://code.google.com/p/chromium/wiki/LinuxBuildInstructions" title="google.com" rel="nofollow">the wiki</a> [google.com]. It's a fast, handy browser (slightly incomplete, but hey, it's alpha), it feels polished for such a new browser and it didn't crash on me yet. It may be worth a shot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>neither Chrome or IE8 work on LinuxI managed to compile the Chromium alpha all right on my standard Ubuntu machine by following the instructions on the wiki [ google.com ] .
It 's a fast , handy browser ( slightly incomplete , but hey , it 's alpha ) , it feels polished for such a new browser and it did n't crash on me yet .
It may be worth a shot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>neither Chrome or IE8 work on LinuxI managed to compile the Chromium alpha all right on my standard Ubuntu machine by following the instructions on the wiki [google.com].
It's a fast, handy browser (slightly incomplete, but hey, it's alpha), it feels polished for such a new browser and it didn't crash on me yet.
It may be worth a shot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197017</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200019</id>
	<title>Re:Brilliant!</title>
	<author>cgenman</author>
	<datestamp>1244062140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Opera has always had an emphasis on keyboard navigation and shortcuts.  Every function has a shortcut, and Opera regularly culls / re-organizes / otherwise intelligently manages their keyboard shortcuts.  Unlike a lot of other browsers, Opera works just fine with only a keyboard (no mouse required).</p><p>So yes, while Firefox / I.E. / Chrome has keyboard shortcuts, none of them actively manage it to the same degree.  None of them really work without a mouse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera has always had an emphasis on keyboard navigation and shortcuts .
Every function has a shortcut , and Opera regularly culls / re-organizes / otherwise intelligently manages their keyboard shortcuts .
Unlike a lot of other browsers , Opera works just fine with only a keyboard ( no mouse required ) .So yes , while Firefox / I.E .
/ Chrome has keyboard shortcuts , none of them actively manage it to the same degree .
None of them really work without a mouse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera has always had an emphasis on keyboard navigation and shortcuts.
Every function has a shortcut, and Opera regularly culls / re-organizes / otherwise intelligently manages their keyboard shortcuts.
Unlike a lot of other browsers, Opera works just fine with only a keyboard (no mouse required).So yes, while Firefox / I.E.
/ Chrome has keyboard shortcuts, none of them actively manage it to the same degree.
None of them really work without a mouse.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197233</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197255</id>
	<title>OS X version</title>
	<author>99BottlesOfBeerInMyF</author>
	<datestamp>1244050020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>A quick look shows the OS X version passes Acid3, is about 10\% slower on javascript benchmarks compared to the last version, and still has no support for system services so it can't use the same spelling checker as all the other OS X programs or the grammar checker or other tools. Basically, I don't see anything that is here to motivate me to switch. Opera may be a really nice browser for Windows, but it is still subpar for OS X.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>A quick look shows the OS X version passes Acid3 , is about 10 \ % slower on javascript benchmarks compared to the last version , and still has no support for system services so it ca n't use the same spelling checker as all the other OS X programs or the grammar checker or other tools .
Basically , I do n't see anything that is here to motivate me to switch .
Opera may be a really nice browser for Windows , but it is still subpar for OS X .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>A quick look shows the OS X version passes Acid3, is about 10\% slower on javascript benchmarks compared to the last version, and still has no support for system services so it can't use the same spelling checker as all the other OS X programs or the grammar checker or other tools.
Basically, I don't see anything that is here to motivate me to switch.
Opera may be a really nice browser for Windows, but it is still subpar for OS X.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199023</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244057220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>...Slashdot (even the homepage) looks like shit in Opera.</p></div><p>Which is a shame, because only in Opera, you can type "/." in the address to go directly to Slashdot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...Slashdot ( even the homepage ) looks like shit in Opera.Which is a shame , because only in Opera , you can type " / .
" in the address to go directly to Slashdot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...Slashdot (even the homepage) looks like shit in Opera.Which is a shame, because only in Opera, you can type "/.
" in the address to go directly to Slashdot.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199937</id>
	<title>Re:How do you define "modern"?</title>
	<author>sexconker</author>
	<datestamp>1244061780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder if we'll see new versions of Opera mobile/mini/whatever they call it for shit like the PS3/DSi/etc.</p><p>The fact that the DSi can't do youtube (because of Flash's ridiculous requirements) is annoying.  Please, youtube, support  and please, Opera, update the DSi browser.</p><p>Similar sentiments for PS3 and HQ mode.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder if we 'll see new versions of Opera mobile/mini/whatever they call it for shit like the PS3/DSi/etc.The fact that the DSi ca n't do youtube ( because of Flash 's ridiculous requirements ) is annoying .
Please , youtube , support and please , Opera , update the DSi browser.Similar sentiments for PS3 and HQ mode .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder if we'll see new versions of Opera mobile/mini/whatever they call it for shit like the PS3/DSi/etc.The fact that the DSi can't do youtube (because of Flash's ridiculous requirements) is annoying.
Please, youtube, support  and please, Opera, update the DSi browser.Similar sentiments for PS3 and HQ mode.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199291</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197429</id>
	<title>Re: Unclogs?</title>
	<author>CarpetShark</author>
	<datestamp>1244050740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>So the internet is... like a series of tubes?</p></div></blockquote><p>No, no... it's the punters who are like a series of tubes.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So the internet is... like a series of tubes ? No , no... it 's the punters who are like a series of tubes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the internet is... like a series of tubes?No, no... it's the punters who are like a series of tubes.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197879</id>
	<title>Re: Unclogs?</title>
	<author>D Ninja</author>
	<datestamp>1244052420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So the internet is... like a series of tubes?</p></div><p>And Opera is the Drain-o.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So the internet is... like a series of tubes ? And Opera is the Drain-o .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the internet is... like a series of tubes?And Opera is the Drain-o.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28256369</id>
	<title>Re:OS X version</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1244454840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It's too bad that SunSpider and other JS benchmarks are completely irrelevant since they only test a tiny part of JS, and JS only makes up a tiny part of even the JS-heaviest sites today. In a few years they will be relevant. Not today. Not for real sites.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It 's too bad that SunSpider and other JS benchmarks are completely irrelevant since they only test a tiny part of JS , and JS only makes up a tiny part of even the JS-heaviest sites today .
In a few years they will be relevant .
Not today .
Not for real sites .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It's too bad that SunSpider and other JS benchmarks are completely irrelevant since they only test a tiny part of JS, and JS only makes up a tiny part of even the JS-heaviest sites today.
In a few years they will be relevant.
Not today.
Not for real sites.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197255</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199243</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244058360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I saw your low 6-digit user ID, but being a sports fan (as opposed to a player) rules out your opinions.</p><p>I think sports fans are somewhere below worms. Strike that, sorry worms!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I saw your low 6-digit user ID , but being a sports fan ( as opposed to a player ) rules out your opinions.I think sports fans are somewhere below worms .
Strike that , sorry worms !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I saw your low 6-digit user ID, but being a sports fan (as opposed to a player) rules out your opinions.I think sports fans are somewhere below worms.
Strike that, sorry worms!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198835</id>
	<title>Re:Turbo Mode Information</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244056380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>aren't browsers always support gziped page since when, 90s? what is the difference?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>are n't browsers always support gziped page since when , 90s ?
what is the difference ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>aren't browsers always support gziped page since when, 90s?
what is the difference?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196775</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196663</id>
	<title>It was not released today</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244047740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It was released a long time ago if you had the alpha version of opera installed and turned on updates.</p><p>and on another note, the alpha was much better than v9, and the beta is much better than the alpha</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It was released a long time ago if you had the alpha version of opera installed and turned on updates.and on another note , the alpha was much better than v9 , and the beta is much better than the alpha</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It was released a long time ago if you had the alpha version of opera installed and turned on updates.and on another note, the alpha was much better than v9, and the beta is much better than the alpha</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</id>
	<title>Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244047800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Opera follows standards, and Slashdot (even the homepage) looks like shit in Opera.</p><p>Really, Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere, like the infamous white on white comment titles.</p><p>I guess that means that for all the talk and the bullshit, Slashdot totally hypocritical when it comes to standards.</p><p>Fix your fucking code or get off your high horse.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera follows standards , and Slashdot ( even the homepage ) looks like shit in Opera.Really , Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere , like the infamous white on white comment titles.I guess that means that for all the talk and the bullshit , Slashdot totally hypocritical when it comes to standards.Fix your fucking code or get off your high horse .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera follows standards, and Slashdot (even the homepage) looks like shit in Opera.Really, Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere, like the infamous white on white comment titles.I guess that means that for all the talk and the bullshit, Slashdot totally hypocritical when it comes to standards.Fix your fucking code or get off your high horse.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197191</id>
	<title>i like opera</title>
	<author>circletimessquare</author>
	<datestamp>1244049840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>always have</p><p>i always make sure the sites i code for render properly in opera, even though this has sometimes taken extra time and gotten me ridiculed</p><p>for sites where opera does not work, the slightest bit of tweaks in the javascript/css usually gets the site working, except for the fact the coder apparently doesn't care</p><p>usually coding for ie and firefox and webkit catches all the snags that would foul up opera. but opera does have its own quirks. most are nonlethal. for example, opera does not respect</p><p>html{overflow-y:scroll}</p><p>opera has issues with border-radius (hopefully version 10 fixes this)</p><p>some oddities involving a:focus/a:active, spacing issues with display:inline-block, etc.</p><p>all minor and nonlethal</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>always havei always make sure the sites i code for render properly in opera , even though this has sometimes taken extra time and gotten me ridiculedfor sites where opera does not work , the slightest bit of tweaks in the javascript/css usually gets the site working , except for the fact the coder apparently does n't careusually coding for ie and firefox and webkit catches all the snags that would foul up opera .
but opera does have its own quirks .
most are nonlethal .
for example , opera does not respecthtml { overflow-y : scroll } opera has issues with border-radius ( hopefully version 10 fixes this ) some oddities involving a : focus/a : active , spacing issues with display : inline-block , etc.all minor and nonlethal</tokentext>
<sentencetext>always havei always make sure the sites i code for render properly in opera, even though this has sometimes taken extra time and gotten me ridiculedfor sites where opera does not work, the slightest bit of tweaks in the javascript/css usually gets the site working, except for the fact the coder apparently doesn't careusually coding for ie and firefox and webkit catches all the snags that would foul up opera.
but opera does have its own quirks.
most are nonlethal.
for example, opera does not respecthtml{overflow-y:scroll}opera has issues with border-radius (hopefully version 10 fixes this)some oddities involving a:focus/a:active, spacing issues with display:inline-block, etc.all minor and nonlethal</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202443</id>
	<title>Re:Turbo?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244027640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>as in: "Ma! It loaded the page in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.05 milliseconds instead of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.1 milliseconds! I can see the difference! It's definitely faster."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc etc</p></div><p>You've been to The New Slashdot, and you still think webpages mostly load in under half a second?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>as in : " Ma !
It loaded the page in .05 milliseconds instead of .1 milliseconds !
I can see the difference !
It 's definitely faster .
" /etc etcYou 've been to The New Slashdot , and you still think webpages mostly load in under half a second ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>as in: "Ma!
It loaded the page in .05 milliseconds instead of .1 milliseconds!
I can see the difference!
It's definitely faster.
" /etc etcYou've been to The New Slashdot, and you still think webpages mostly load in under half a second?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196807</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206113</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244056080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What kind of webpages did you have open at the time it was using 700M? I have an older Opera 10 beta running, uptime of 34 days, with 76 (damn I need to close stuff) tabs open, and it is only using 141M RAM (240M VM).</p><p>I guess it depends on browsed content. As I have the opposite experience with FireFox3 (being the worst among Opera,Chrome,IE8,FF3), where FF3 hogs the most resources.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What kind of webpages did you have open at the time it was using 700M ?
I have an older Opera 10 beta running , uptime of 34 days , with 76 ( damn I need to close stuff ) tabs open , and it is only using 141M RAM ( 240M VM ) .I guess it depends on browsed content .
As I have the opposite experience with FireFox3 ( being the worst among Opera,Chrome,IE8,FF3 ) , where FF3 hogs the most resources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What kind of webpages did you have open at the time it was using 700M?
I have an older Opera 10 beta running, uptime of 34 days, with 76 (damn I need to close stuff) tabs open, and it is only using 141M RAM (240M VM).I guess it depends on browsed content.
As I have the opposite experience with FireFox3 (being the worst among Opera,Chrome,IE8,FF3), where FF3 hogs the most resources.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198175</id>
	<title>Re: Unclogs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244053560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Opera 10: Drain-o for the Intartubes.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera 10 : Drain-o for the Intartubes .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera 10: Drain-o for the Intartubes.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199373</id>
	<title>Configuration</title>
	<author>Adm.Wiggin</author>
	<datestamp>1244059020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>...a new interface...</p></div><p>Does the configuration dialog still look/feel awful?  If so, is it an improved awful?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>...a new interface...Does the configuration dialog still look/feel awful ?
If so , is it an improved awful ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ...a new interface...Does the configuration dialog still look/feel awful?
If so, is it an improved awful?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28204297</id>
	<title>Re:OS X version</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244036880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Um, no, it's about 40\% faster on Javascript compared with 9.64, on Linux at least, running Sunspider.</p><p>Being multiplatform, it's not likely that Opera will specifically engineer chunks of the browser for the Mac. That's the deal with multiplatform software; +ve is you can be in the same familiar place on any OS, -ve is it isn't going to integrate so tightly with each OS. You see this as poor but it's actually a feature, especially for those of us that use more than 1 OS. Safari is also a lousy integrator into Windows. Does that make Safari bad?</p><p>On that note, sounds like Safari is right up your street. In the end different browsers have different market segments and appeal. It's just not what floats your boat - doesn't make it bad, just bad for you. Bye bye...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Um , no , it 's about 40 \ % faster on Javascript compared with 9.64 , on Linux at least , running Sunspider.Being multiplatform , it 's not likely that Opera will specifically engineer chunks of the browser for the Mac .
That 's the deal with multiplatform software ; + ve is you can be in the same familiar place on any OS , -ve is it is n't going to integrate so tightly with each OS .
You see this as poor but it 's actually a feature , especially for those of us that use more than 1 OS .
Safari is also a lousy integrator into Windows .
Does that make Safari bad ? On that note , sounds like Safari is right up your street .
In the end different browsers have different market segments and appeal .
It 's just not what floats your boat - does n't make it bad , just bad for you .
Bye bye.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Um, no, it's about 40\% faster on Javascript compared with 9.64, on Linux at least, running Sunspider.Being multiplatform, it's not likely that Opera will specifically engineer chunks of the browser for the Mac.
That's the deal with multiplatform software; +ve is you can be in the same familiar place on any OS, -ve is it isn't going to integrate so tightly with each OS.
You see this as poor but it's actually a feature, especially for those of us that use more than 1 OS.
Safari is also a lousy integrator into Windows.
Does that make Safari bad?On that note, sounds like Safari is right up your street.
In the end different browsers have different market segments and appeal.
It's just not what floats your boat - doesn't make it bad, just bad for you.
Bye bye...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197255</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196959</id>
	<title>Re: Unclogs?</title>
	<author>sznupi</author>
	<datestamp>1244048880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Those are servers of Opera (the company). And they've been doing this for quite some time with their Opera Mini (for Java mobile phones).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Those are servers of Opera ( the company ) .
And they 've been doing this for quite some time with their Opera Mini ( for Java mobile phones ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Those are servers of Opera (the company).
And they've been doing this for quite some time with their Opera Mini (for Java mobile phones).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28207629</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244120460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Huge memory usage generally isn't a problem, it's only a perceived problem. It's mostly using a lot of memory to speed up page loads, back button, closed tab reopening.</p><p>The only time large memory usage can become a problem is when page trashing starts to occur (writing ram out to swap space) which if you switch applications frequently, brings on the symptoms of slowness.</p><p>If you browser is using an abnormal amount of ram, generally this is a symptom of a memory leak, either a script on a site is not freeing memory properly (facebook and google reader do this sometimes for me) or an extension is leaking memory (happens all too often with firebug). I fix this by clearing out the cache and reloading those sites.</p><p>Issues with AJAX generally aren't the browsers fault, but more the developers fault. Opera provide a javascript greasemonkey style script to fix popular broken sites, this works very well in my opinion.</p><p>All in all, browsers are fairly amazing applications these days, considering the length of time people spend in them and the complexity of websites running within them.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Huge memory usage generally is n't a problem , it 's only a perceived problem .
It 's mostly using a lot of memory to speed up page loads , back button , closed tab reopening.The only time large memory usage can become a problem is when page trashing starts to occur ( writing ram out to swap space ) which if you switch applications frequently , brings on the symptoms of slowness.If you browser is using an abnormal amount of ram , generally this is a symptom of a memory leak , either a script on a site is not freeing memory properly ( facebook and google reader do this sometimes for me ) or an extension is leaking memory ( happens all too often with firebug ) .
I fix this by clearing out the cache and reloading those sites.Issues with AJAX generally are n't the browsers fault , but more the developers fault .
Opera provide a javascript greasemonkey style script to fix popular broken sites , this works very well in my opinion.All in all , browsers are fairly amazing applications these days , considering the length of time people spend in them and the complexity of websites running within them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Huge memory usage generally isn't a problem, it's only a perceived problem.
It's mostly using a lot of memory to speed up page loads, back button, closed tab reopening.The only time large memory usage can become a problem is when page trashing starts to occur (writing ram out to swap space) which if you switch applications frequently, brings on the symptoms of slowness.If you browser is using an abnormal amount of ram, generally this is a symptom of a memory leak, either a script on a site is not freeing memory properly (facebook and google reader do this sometimes for me) or an extension is leaking memory (happens all too often with firebug).
I fix this by clearing out the cache and reloading those sites.Issues with AJAX generally aren't the browsers fault, but more the developers fault.
Opera provide a javascript greasemonkey style script to fix popular broken sites, this works very well in my opinion.All in all, browsers are fairly amazing applications these days, considering the length of time people spend in them and the complexity of websites running within them.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197513</id>
	<title>Re:passes an even tougher test than acid3</title>
	<author>TurboNed</author>
	<datestamp>1244051100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Running Firefox 3.0.10 on XP SP3 and following your instructions (opened a new tab, navigated to <a href="http://slashdot.org/" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow">http://slashdot.org/</a> [slashdot.org] then clicked "Read more..." on the Google's Android to Challenge Windows? article), everything appeared fine.  I assume that when you said "titles of stories" you meant "headers of comments"?  When I'm reading a story, I don't see titles to other stories.  Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the error that I'm supposed to be looking for?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Running Firefox 3.0.10 on XP SP3 and following your instructions ( opened a new tab , navigated to http : //slashdot.org/ [ slashdot.org ] then clicked " Read more... " on the Google 's Android to Challenge Windows ?
article ) , everything appeared fine .
I assume that when you said " titles of stories " you meant " headers of comments " ?
When I 'm reading a story , I do n't see titles to other stories .
Perhaps I 'm misunderstanding the error that I 'm supposed to be looking for ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Running Firefox 3.0.10 on XP SP3 and following your instructions (opened a new tab, navigated to http://slashdot.org/ [slashdot.org] then clicked "Read more..." on the Google's Android to Challenge Windows?
article), everything appeared fine.
I assume that when you said "titles of stories" you meant "headers of comments"?
When I'm reading a story, I don't see titles to other stories.
Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the error that I'm supposed to be looking for?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200241</id>
	<title>New design, eh?</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1244019660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Wonder if that means if it will finally be able to change THE FONTSIZE on the fly on pages (as opposed to now where it just ZOOMs into the page)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Wonder if that means if it will finally be able to change THE FONTSIZE on the fly on pages ( as opposed to now where it just ZOOMs into the page )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Wonder if that means if it will finally be able to change THE FONTSIZE on the fly on pages (as opposed to now where it just ZOOMs into the page)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197963</id>
	<title>Opera and Adblock</title>
	<author>yoshi\_mon</author>
	<datestamp>1244052720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It has already come up in this thread but I think it warrants another post on the subject.  And just some quick background:  I used Opera as my main browser since right around IE3.  Looking it up now I see that IE3 came out in Aug 96' and Opera was released to the public in 96 as well.  One of the main reasons I liked it was how they supported the nix platforms, albeit just with binaries, as well as Win32.</p><p>Anyway suffice to say I used Opera for a long time, recommended it to friends who I thought were advanced enough to use it (Bit of a backhanded statement I know but oh well.), and even was sad when I moved away from it late last year.  And the reason I finally did move away from it was that Firefox + Ablock + Noscript simply is a better overall experience.</p><p><i>And yes I know Opera has/has had it's own content blocking for ages now</i>, that is not the point.  It is not nearly the same thing as plugging in Adblock, picking your list, and then you just go.  I also say this having already used, and continue to use, my hosts file as a filter as well.</p><p>As good as Opera is, and I still think it does a lot of things better/faster than anything else, the again overall experience with Firefox when you have it's addon support makes it better.  And Firefox is also a much better replacement when moving an end user away from IE.</p><p>Opera, unless they do some really bad things, will always have a home on my PCs but right now Firefox is better for day to day usage.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It has already come up in this thread but I think it warrants another post on the subject .
And just some quick background : I used Opera as my main browser since right around IE3 .
Looking it up now I see that IE3 came out in Aug 96 ' and Opera was released to the public in 96 as well .
One of the main reasons I liked it was how they supported the nix platforms , albeit just with binaries , as well as Win32.Anyway suffice to say I used Opera for a long time , recommended it to friends who I thought were advanced enough to use it ( Bit of a backhanded statement I know but oh well .
) , and even was sad when I moved away from it late last year .
And the reason I finally did move away from it was that Firefox + Ablock + Noscript simply is a better overall experience.And yes I know Opera has/has had it 's own content blocking for ages now , that is not the point .
It is not nearly the same thing as plugging in Adblock , picking your list , and then you just go .
I also say this having already used , and continue to use , my hosts file as a filter as well.As good as Opera is , and I still think it does a lot of things better/faster than anything else , the again overall experience with Firefox when you have it 's addon support makes it better .
And Firefox is also a much better replacement when moving an end user away from IE.Opera , unless they do some really bad things , will always have a home on my PCs but right now Firefox is better for day to day usage .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has already come up in this thread but I think it warrants another post on the subject.
And just some quick background:  I used Opera as my main browser since right around IE3.
Looking it up now I see that IE3 came out in Aug 96' and Opera was released to the public in 96 as well.
One of the main reasons I liked it was how they supported the nix platforms, albeit just with binaries, as well as Win32.Anyway suffice to say I used Opera for a long time, recommended it to friends who I thought were advanced enough to use it (Bit of a backhanded statement I know but oh well.
), and even was sad when I moved away from it late last year.
And the reason I finally did move away from it was that Firefox + Ablock + Noscript simply is a better overall experience.And yes I know Opera has/has had it's own content blocking for ages now, that is not the point.
It is not nearly the same thing as plugging in Adblock, picking your list, and then you just go.
I also say this having already used, and continue to use, my hosts file as a filter as well.As good as Opera is, and I still think it does a lot of things better/faster than anything else, the again overall experience with Firefox when you have it's addon support makes it better.
And Firefox is also a much better replacement when moving an end user away from IE.Opera, unless they do some really bad things, will always have a home on my PCs but right now Firefox is better for day to day usage.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197525</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244051160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, slashdot does very good job to be browser-agnostic:<br>Looks like a shit in any browser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , slashdot does very good job to be browser-agnostic : Looks like a shit in any browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, slashdot does very good job to be browser-agnostic:Looks like a shit in any browser.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202217</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>swarsron</author>
	<datestamp>1244026800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot it a total joke on opera 6.63. Fetching new comments freezes it for about 10-20 seconds, logging in after writing a comment brings one to the main page (deleting everything written),<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.... web 2.0 fucking bullshit</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot it a total joke on opera 6.63 .
Fetching new comments freezes it for about 10-20 seconds , logging in after writing a comment brings one to the main page ( deleting everything written ) , .... web 2.0 fucking bullshit</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot it a total joke on opera 6.63.
Fetching new comments freezes it for about 10-20 seconds, logging in after writing a comment brings one to the main page (deleting everything written), .... web 2.0 fucking bullshit</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197755</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198697</id>
	<title>Re:passes an even tougher test than acid3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244055600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I read the site daily and have never had the issue you mention...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I read the site daily and have never had the issue you mention.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I read the site daily and have never had the issue you mention...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244048580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Slashdot on Chromium and Firefox.<br>No troubles here!<br>You guys are either exaggerating or bending the truth.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Slashdot on Chromium and Firefox.No troubles here ! You guys are either exaggerating or bending the truth .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Slashdot on Chromium and Firefox.No troubles here!You guys are either exaggerating or bending the truth.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196925</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>SirGeek</author>
	<datestamp>1244048700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Really, Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere, like the infamous white on white comment titles.</p></div><p>Oh thank goodness.  I just thought I was losing it...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere , like the infamous white on white comment titles.Oh thank goodness .
I just thought I was losing it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere, like the infamous white on white comment titles.Oh thank goodness.
I just thought I was losing it...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202329</id>
	<title>The thumbnail tabs should be on the side</title>
	<author>iliketrash</author>
	<datestamp>1244027160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm glad to see that some of the major browsers are finally using thumbnail tabs that have been in OmniWeb for many years, but in the case of Opera 10, they made a major mistake by putting them at the top of the window, thus limiting the vertical area available for displaying content. The thumbnail tabs should be at the side of the main window, leaving the full height for content display. Why is vertical space more important than horizontal screen space for displaying content? Because web pages scroll vertically and robbing vertical screen space forces more scrolling. Web pages are limited in their horizontal extent for the same reason that newspapers are printed in columns--it makes reading text easier.</p><p>The Opera folks should put an option to place the thumbnail tabs on the right or left side.</p><p>A more minor mistake with the thumbnail tabs is that rather than scaling the thumbnails when revealing them, they are simply truncated.</p><p>I'll be sticking with OmniWeb at least until someone finally rips off every innovative and years-old feature of that browser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm glad to see that some of the major browsers are finally using thumbnail tabs that have been in OmniWeb for many years , but in the case of Opera 10 , they made a major mistake by putting them at the top of the window , thus limiting the vertical area available for displaying content .
The thumbnail tabs should be at the side of the main window , leaving the full height for content display .
Why is vertical space more important than horizontal screen space for displaying content ?
Because web pages scroll vertically and robbing vertical screen space forces more scrolling .
Web pages are limited in their horizontal extent for the same reason that newspapers are printed in columns--it makes reading text easier.The Opera folks should put an option to place the thumbnail tabs on the right or left side.A more minor mistake with the thumbnail tabs is that rather than scaling the thumbnails when revealing them , they are simply truncated.I 'll be sticking with OmniWeb at least until someone finally rips off every innovative and years-old feature of that browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm glad to see that some of the major browsers are finally using thumbnail tabs that have been in OmniWeb for many years, but in the case of Opera 10, they made a major mistake by putting them at the top of the window, thus limiting the vertical area available for displaying content.
The thumbnail tabs should be at the side of the main window, leaving the full height for content display.
Why is vertical space more important than horizontal screen space for displaying content?
Because web pages scroll vertically and robbing vertical screen space forces more scrolling.
Web pages are limited in their horizontal extent for the same reason that newspapers are printed in columns--it makes reading text easier.The Opera folks should put an option to place the thumbnail tabs on the right or left side.A more minor mistake with the thumbnail tabs is that rather than scaling the thumbnails when revealing them, they are simply truncated.I'll be sticking with OmniWeb at least until someone finally rips off every innovative and years-old feature of that browser.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198723</id>
	<title>Re:I really like Opera but</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244055720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Stay with Firefox then. It's a good browser. Opera is only "better" overall in subjective feel. I prefer Opera. I've preferred Opera since 3.5. But I put friends and family on FF because most people generally seem to like it better. For me, FF is horribly clunky, while Opera has always made intuitive sense.</p><p>I used to say Opera was the only app I had that reminded me of my beloved Amiga 1000. Then a few years back I found out the guy in charge of Opera UI is an old Amiga-head, so maybe it was more than coincidence.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Stay with Firefox then .
It 's a good browser .
Opera is only " better " overall in subjective feel .
I prefer Opera .
I 've preferred Opera since 3.5 .
But I put friends and family on FF because most people generally seem to like it better .
For me , FF is horribly clunky , while Opera has always made intuitive sense.I used to say Opera was the only app I had that reminded me of my beloved Amiga 1000 .
Then a few years back I found out the guy in charge of Opera UI is an old Amiga-head , so maybe it was more than coincidence .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Stay with Firefox then.
It's a good browser.
Opera is only "better" overall in subjective feel.
I prefer Opera.
I've preferred Opera since 3.5.
But I put friends and family on FF because most people generally seem to like it better.
For me, FF is horribly clunky, while Opera has always made intuitive sense.I used to say Opera was the only app I had that reminded me of my beloved Amiga 1000.
Then a few years back I found out the guy in charge of Opera UI is an old Amiga-head, so maybe it was more than coincidence.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199349</id>
	<title>Unstable</title>
	<author>davegaramond</author>
	<datestamp>1244058960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <tt>$ grep kill ~/.bash\_history | grep opera | tail -5</tt>

</p><p> <tt>killall -9 opera</tt>

</p><p> <tt>killall -USR2 opera</tt>

</p><p> <tt>killall -9 opera</tt>

</p><p> <tt>killall -9 -9 -9 opera</tt>

</p><p> <tt>killall -9 opera</tt>


</p><p> <tt>$ grep kill ~/.bash\_history | grep opera | wc -l</tt>

</p><p> <tt>175</tt>

</p><p>I've used Opera for years since the 5.x days and have always loved it, but the past year it's generally becoming less stable and more annoying. It always seems to eat 100\% cpu after some time, or crash at other times. Some builds are really terrible, stability- and performance-wise. Meanwhile Firefox is getting faster and faster and more stable and I'm finding myself opening Firefox more and more often.</p><p>However (unfortunately?), nothing comes close in handling lots of open tabs like Opera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>$ grep kill ~ /.bash \ _history | grep opera | tail -5 killall -9 opera killall -USR2 opera killall -9 opera killall -9 -9 -9 opera killall -9 opera $ grep kill ~ /.bash \ _history | grep opera | wc -l 175 I 've used Opera for years since the 5.x days and have always loved it , but the past year it 's generally becoming less stable and more annoying .
It always seems to eat 100 \ % cpu after some time , or crash at other times .
Some builds are really terrible , stability- and performance-wise .
Meanwhile Firefox is getting faster and faster and more stable and I 'm finding myself opening Firefox more and more often.However ( unfortunately ?
) , nothing comes close in handling lots of open tabs like Opera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> $ grep kill ~/.bash\_history | grep opera | tail -5

 killall -9 opera

 killall -USR2 opera

 killall -9 opera

 killall -9 -9 -9 opera

 killall -9 opera


 $ grep kill ~/.bash\_history | grep opera | wc -l

 175

I've used Opera for years since the 5.x days and have always loved it, but the past year it's generally becoming less stable and more annoying.
It always seems to eat 100\% cpu after some time, or crash at other times.
Some builds are really terrible, stability- and performance-wise.
Meanwhile Firefox is getting faster and faster and more stable and I'm finding myself opening Firefox more and more often.However (unfortunately?
), nothing comes close in handling lots of open tabs like Opera.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198305</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244054040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>like the infamous white on white comment titles.</p></div></blockquote><p>I haven't seen this yet. Using Opera 9.64 &amp; Firefox 3.0.10 on Ubuntu 8.04LTS.</p><p>FF is running stock, Opera has js OFF for slashdot.org.</p><p>Opera<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/has/ had a problem for about a week where the new-form front page links don't work. That finally got fixed yesterday, but now the story pages load slow like like they did with js ON. (argh.)</p><p>Yes, I entirely agree with you about<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/.'s attitude to web standards, but it's fair to point out that the comment title issue people have been bitching about doesn't happen to all Firefox. Odd, that.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>like the infamous white on white comment titles.I have n't seen this yet .
Using Opera 9.64 &amp; Firefox 3.0.10 on Ubuntu 8.04LTS.FF is running stock , Opera has js OFF for slashdot.org.Opera /has/ had a problem for about a week where the new-form front page links do n't work .
That finally got fixed yesterday , but now the story pages load slow like like they did with js ON .
( argh. ) Yes , I entirely agree with you about / .
's attitude to web standards , but it 's fair to point out that the comment title issue people have been bitching about does n't happen to all Firefox .
Odd , that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>like the infamous white on white comment titles.I haven't seen this yet.
Using Opera 9.64 &amp; Firefox 3.0.10 on Ubuntu 8.04LTS.FF is running stock, Opera has js OFF for slashdot.org.Opera /has/ had a problem for about a week where the new-form front page links don't work.
That finally got fixed yesterday, but now the story pages load slow like like they did with js ON.
(argh.)Yes, I entirely agree with you about /.
's attitude to web standards, but it's fair to point out that the comment title issue people have been bitching about doesn't happen to all Firefox.
Odd, that.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197349</id>
	<title>Re:How do you define "modern"?</title>
	<author>ClosedSource</author>
	<datestamp>1244050440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can download Opera for AmigaOS 4.1 from the Timex-Sinclair server.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can download Opera for AmigaOS 4.1 from the Timex-Sinclair server .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can download Opera for AmigaOS 4.1 from the Timex-Sinclair server.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197709</id>
	<title>Re:How do you define "modern"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244051820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From here:</p><p>ftp://ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Mosaic/<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;&gt;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From here : ftp : //ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Mosaic/ ; &gt; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From here:ftp://ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Mosaic/ ;&gt;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28203373</id>
	<title>Re: Unclogs?</title>
	<author>mattmatt</author>
	<datestamp>1244031480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera Mini's been doing something like this for ages, for free, and I've not experienced any bottleneck issues.

I just wonder about what sort of logs this proxy keeps...</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera Mini 's been doing something like this for ages , for free , and I 've not experienced any bottleneck issues .
I just wonder about what sort of logs this proxy keeps.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera Mini's been doing something like this for ages, for free, and I've not experienced any bottleneck issues.
I just wonder about what sort of logs this proxy keeps...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196833</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199139</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Eil</author>
	<datestamp>1244057820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>like the infamous white on white comment titles.</p></div></blockquote><p>Huh. I thought it was my ad-blocker or something acting up. I didn't seriously think that the Slashdot coders would let such an obvious and annoying bug persist for a full week (or more?) but I guess I was wrong.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>like the infamous white on white comment titles.Huh .
I thought it was my ad-blocker or something acting up .
I did n't seriously think that the Slashdot coders would let such an obvious and annoying bug persist for a full week ( or more ?
) but I guess I was wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>like the infamous white on white comment titles.Huh.
I thought it was my ad-blocker or something acting up.
I didn't seriously think that the Slashdot coders would let such an obvious and annoying bug persist for a full week (or more?
) but I guess I was wrong.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197521</id>
	<title>AdBlock Plus? NoScript?</title>
	<author>MrMista\_B</author>
	<datestamp>1244051100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, does Opera have any functionality at least as good as AdBlockPlus and NoScript?</p><p>They are the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/only/ reason I use Firefox. Really, for webbrowsers, AdBlock Plus is the killer app - if Opera can block ads at least that well, I'll be done with Firefox for good. If not, I have no reason to use it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , does Opera have any functionality at least as good as AdBlockPlus and NoScript ? They are the /only/ reason I use Firefox .
Really , for webbrowsers , AdBlock Plus is the killer app - if Opera can block ads at least that well , I 'll be done with Firefox for good .
If not , I have no reason to use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, does Opera have any functionality at least as good as AdBlockPlus and NoScript?They are the /only/ reason I use Firefox.
Really, for webbrowsers, AdBlock Plus is the killer app - if Opera can block ads at least that well, I'll be done with Firefox for good.
If not, I have no reason to use it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659</id>
	<title>Unclogs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244047740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unclogs your connection?</p><p>So the internet is... like a series of tubes?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unclogs your connection ? So the internet is... like a series of tubes ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unclogs your connection?So the internet is... like a series of tubes?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199765</id>
	<title>Still can't correctly render two nested DIVs.</title>
	<author>TodLiebeck</author>
	<datestamp>1244061060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>It may be ACID3 compliant, but it still can't correctly render two nested DIVs:
<br>
<br>
<a href="http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=250572" title="opera.com">http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=250572</a> [opera.com]
<br>
<br>
To see it fail, just go to this page in Opera 10: <a href="http://echo.nextapp.com/content/test/operacss/" title="nextapp.com">http://echo.nextapp.com/content/test/operacss/</a> [nextapp.com] , and resize your browser vertically (but NOT horizontally).  It's been reported in the bugtracker, forums, forum PMs to developers, etc..
<br>
<br>
So please, when you file that bug report today that "Opera 10 doesn't render things correctly" to whatever your AJAX framework of choice happens to be, don't make a big deal out of the fact that it's "Acid3 compliant" and thus the AJAX framework developers must be in the wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>It may be ACID3 compliant , but it still ca n't correctly render two nested DIVs : http : //my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml ? id = 250572 [ opera.com ] To see it fail , just go to this page in Opera 10 : http : //echo.nextapp.com/content/test/operacss/ [ nextapp.com ] , and resize your browser vertically ( but NOT horizontally ) .
It 's been reported in the bugtracker , forums , forum PMs to developers , etc. . So please , when you file that bug report today that " Opera 10 does n't render things correctly " to whatever your AJAX framework of choice happens to be , do n't make a big deal out of the fact that it 's " Acid3 compliant " and thus the AJAX framework developers must be in the wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It may be ACID3 compliant, but it still can't correctly render two nested DIVs:


http://my.opera.com/community/forums/topic.dml?id=250572 [opera.com]


To see it fail, just go to this page in Opera 10: http://echo.nextapp.com/content/test/operacss/ [nextapp.com] , and resize your browser vertically (but NOT horizontally).
It's been reported in the bugtracker, forums, forum PMs to developers, etc..


So please, when you file that bug report today that "Opera 10 doesn't render things correctly" to whatever your AJAX framework of choice happens to be, don't make a big deal out of the fact that it's "Acid3 compliant" and thus the AJAX framework developers must be in the wrong.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196757</id>
	<title>Seems even faster than 9.x</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244048100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seems quite fast, even compared to regular Opera. Entire pages just appear, rather than slowly loading/displaying...</p><p>Kudos to the team!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seems quite fast , even compared to regular Opera .
Entire pages just appear , rather than slowly loading/displaying...Kudos to the team !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seems quite fast, even compared to regular Opera.
Entire pages just appear, rather than slowly loading/displaying...Kudos to the team!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197311</id>
	<title>Re: Unclogs?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244050320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unclogs your connection?</p><p>So the internet is... like a series of tubes?</p></div><p>WRONG!</p><p>It's more like a big truck.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unclogs your connection ? So the internet is... like a series of tubes ? WRONG ! It 's more like a big truck .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unclogs your connection?So the internet is... like a series of tubes?WRONG!It's more like a big truck.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197735</id>
	<title>Re:passes an even tougher test than acid3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244051880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've used Firefox since it was Firebird, on a variety of computers, although generally only on Windows OS's.  While I'm only an on-again, off-again Slashdot visitor, I have <strong>never</strong> experienced the rendering issues I've seen people mention again and again; I've never seen "missing" or "white on white" comment titles, in any section.</p><p>As you mention Ubuntu in your bug report, I'm wondering if this bug only shows up on certain OS's?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've used Firefox since it was Firebird , on a variety of computers , although generally only on Windows OS 's .
While I 'm only an on-again , off-again Slashdot visitor , I have never experienced the rendering issues I 've seen people mention again and again ; I 've never seen " missing " or " white on white " comment titles , in any section.As you mention Ubuntu in your bug report , I 'm wondering if this bug only shows up on certain OS 's ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've used Firefox since it was Firebird, on a variety of computers, although generally only on Windows OS's.
While I'm only an on-again, off-again Slashdot visitor, I have never experienced the rendering issues I've seen people mention again and again; I've never seen "missing" or "white on white" comment titles, in any section.As you mention Ubuntu in your bug report, I'm wondering if this bug only shows up on certain OS's?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197839</id>
	<title>Re:How do you define "modern"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244052240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Here:</p><p>ftp://ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Mosaic/<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:&gt;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Here : ftp : //ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Mosaic/ : &gt; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Here:ftp://ftp.ncsa.uiuc.edu/Mosaic/ :&gt;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28203855</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>mdwh2</author>
	<datestamp>1244033760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Do you have reading comprehension trouble? He said Opera.</p><p>I'm on Opera, and firehose is unusable. And the format used for "Idle" is unreadable (not that I'm missing much there...)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Do you have reading comprehension trouble ?
He said Opera.I 'm on Opera , and firehose is unusable .
And the format used for " Idle " is unreadable ( not that I 'm missing much there... )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Do you have reading comprehension trouble?
He said Opera.I'm on Opera, and firehose is unusable.
And the format used for "Idle" is unreadable (not that I'm missing much there...)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198313</id>
	<title>Re:passes an even tougher test than acid3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244054100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's not a browser bug.  Sometimes ".comment div.title" shows up twice in the CSS and the second appearance takes precedence and turns off the background image.</p><p>See <a href="http://c.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css?T\_2\_5\_0\_258b" title="fsdn.com" rel="nofollow">http://c.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css?T\_2\_5\_0\_258b</a> [fsdn.com] for an example of the broken css and search for ".comment div.title"</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's not a browser bug .
Sometimes " .comment div.title " shows up twice in the CSS and the second appearance takes precedence and turns off the background image.See http : //c.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css ? T \ _2 \ _5 \ _0 \ _258b [ fsdn.com ] for an example of the broken css and search for " .comment div.title "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's not a browser bug.
Sometimes ".comment div.title" shows up twice in the CSS and the second appearance takes precedence and turns off the background image.See http://c.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css?T\_2\_5\_0\_258b [fsdn.com] for an example of the broken css and search for ".comment div.title"</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198139</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244053380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's this concept called "open source"... you might have heard of it...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's this concept called " open source " ... you might have heard of it.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's this concept called "open source"... you might have heard of it...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197755</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Macthorpe</author>
	<datestamp>1244051940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>No, I can corroborate that - subject headings still appear in black on dark green in Opera (which they don't in Firefox). Comment titles regularly go white on white, though that can be fixed by doing some random clicky jiggery-pokery.</p><p>On the plus side, the actual speed of the site is far better in Opera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>No , I can corroborate that - subject headings still appear in black on dark green in Opera ( which they do n't in Firefox ) .
Comment titles regularly go white on white , though that can be fixed by doing some random clicky jiggery-pokery.On the plus side , the actual speed of the site is far better in Opera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No, I can corroborate that - subject headings still appear in black on dark green in Opera (which they don't in Firefox).
Comment titles regularly go white on white, though that can be fixed by doing some random clicky jiggery-pokery.On the plus side, the actual speed of the site is far better in Opera.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197403</id>
	<title>Smart Card Support</title>
	<author>caubert</author>
	<datestamp>1244050680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera is my primary browser, but it saddens me they have not implemented smart card support. Here in Estonia we use our ID-cards everyday and it's painful to use FF or IE for banking, voting etc.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera is my primary browser , but it saddens me they have not implemented smart card support .
Here in Estonia we use our ID-cards everyday and it 's painful to use FF or IE for banking , voting etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera is my primary browser, but it saddens me they have not implemented smart card support.
Here in Estonia we use our ID-cards everyday and it's painful to use FF or IE for banking, voting etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197493</id>
	<title>Re:passes an even tougher test than acid3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244050980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Random reader here.  I just tried exactly your steps in Firefox and there's no white on white for me.  Renders just fine.  I don't have my Mac with me but I haven't previously noticed this on Safari either.  Probably not universally reproducible.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Random reader here .
I just tried exactly your steps in Firefox and there 's no white on white for me .
Renders just fine .
I do n't have my Mac with me but I have n't previously noticed this on Safari either .
Probably not universally reproducible .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Random reader here.
I just tried exactly your steps in Firefox and there's no white on white for me.
Renders just fine.
I don't have my Mac with me but I haven't previously noticed this on Safari either.
Probably not universally reproducible.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202971</id>
	<title>Re:AdBlock Plus? NoScript?</title>
	<author>KDEWolf</author>
	<datestamp>1244029740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So, does Opera have any functionality at least as good as AdBlockPlus and NoScript?</p><p>They are the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/only/ reason I use Firefox. Really, for webbrowsers, AdBlock Plus is the killer app - if Opera can block ads at least that well, I'll be done with Firefox for good. If not, I have no reason to use it.</p></div><p>----<b>AdBlockPlus:</b> <br> <br>

Yes! From-the-box! Just right-click any "blank" (non-image nor Flash, let's say) part of the current displayed page. Then select "Block Content" (shortcut K). <br> <br>

It'll change to an "ad-kill mode", where the page itself gets transparent and only images and flash applets stand out normally (also from iframes).<br>
If you click any of them, Opera will block anything else coming from that url folder (like www.google/ads/, for example).<br>
If you just want to get rid of a single banner/flash, hold shift before clicking them.<br> <br>

Also, you can pre-block hosts via URL filtering urlfilter.ini ( <a href="http://www.schrode.net/opera/url\_filtering/" title="schrode.net" rel="nofollow">http://www.schrode.net/opera/url\_filtering/</a> [schrode.net] ).<br> <br>

----<b>NoScript:</b> <br> <br>
Yes, also another from-the-box feature. For global settings: "Tools" menu -&gt; "Preferences..." -&gt; "Advanced" tab -&gt; "Content" -&gt; Javascript Options button.<br>
Or, for per-site settings, just right-click the current page and select "Edit Site Preferences". You can also set CSS stuff this way, and add Javascript Files to run on some or all sites like on greasemokey.<br> <br>

Ahoy!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So , does Opera have any functionality at least as good as AdBlockPlus and NoScript ? They are the /only/ reason I use Firefox .
Really , for webbrowsers , AdBlock Plus is the killer app - if Opera can block ads at least that well , I 'll be done with Firefox for good .
If not , I have no reason to use it.----AdBlockPlus : Yes !
From-the-box ! Just right-click any " blank " ( non-image nor Flash , let 's say ) part of the current displayed page .
Then select " Block Content " ( shortcut K ) .
It 'll change to an " ad-kill mode " , where the page itself gets transparent and only images and flash applets stand out normally ( also from iframes ) .
If you click any of them , Opera will block anything else coming from that url folder ( like www.google/ads/ , for example ) .
If you just want to get rid of a single banner/flash , hold shift before clicking them .
Also , you can pre-block hosts via URL filtering urlfilter.ini ( http : //www.schrode.net/opera/url \ _filtering/ [ schrode.net ] ) .
----NoScript : Yes , also another from-the-box feature .
For global settings : " Tools " menu - &gt; " Preferences... " - &gt; " Advanced " tab - &gt; " Content " - &gt; Javascript Options button .
Or , for per-site settings , just right-click the current page and select " Edit Site Preferences " .
You can also set CSS stuff this way , and add Javascript Files to run on some or all sites like on greasemokey .
Ahoy !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, does Opera have any functionality at least as good as AdBlockPlus and NoScript?They are the /only/ reason I use Firefox.
Really, for webbrowsers, AdBlock Plus is the killer app - if Opera can block ads at least that well, I'll be done with Firefox for good.
If not, I have no reason to use it.----AdBlockPlus:  

Yes!
From-the-box! Just right-click any "blank" (non-image nor Flash, let's say) part of the current displayed page.
Then select "Block Content" (shortcut K).
It'll change to an "ad-kill mode", where the page itself gets transparent and only images and flash applets stand out normally (also from iframes).
If you click any of them, Opera will block anything else coming from that url folder (like www.google/ads/, for example).
If you just want to get rid of a single banner/flash, hold shift before clicking them.
Also, you can pre-block hosts via URL filtering urlfilter.ini ( http://www.schrode.net/opera/url\_filtering/ [schrode.net] ).
----NoScript:  
Yes, also another from-the-box feature.
For global settings: "Tools" menu -&gt; "Preferences..." -&gt; "Advanced" tab -&gt; "Content" -&gt; Javascript Options button.
Or, for per-site settings, just right-click the current page and select "Edit Site Preferences".
You can also set CSS stuff this way, and add Javascript Files to run on some or all sites like on greasemokey.
Ahoy!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197521</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196667</id>
	<title>Turbo button...yes!</title>
	<author>Smidge207</author>
	<datestamp>1244047800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So I can go from 16Mhz to 32Mhz browsing at the touch of a button, you say? I'm all for it! Wait a second....</p><p>=Smidge=</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So I can go from 16Mhz to 32Mhz browsing at the touch of a button , you say ?
I 'm all for it !
Wait a second.... = Smidge =</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So I can go from 16Mhz to 32Mhz browsing at the touch of a button, you say?
I'm all for it!
Wait a second....=Smidge=</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196807</id>
	<title>Turbo?</title>
	<author>poetmatt</author>
	<datestamp>1244048340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Maybe they should have put a big red R in the word turbo for racing, so that people will believe their browser goes faster. Or they should give all their users a Type-R sticker to print out.</p><p>as in: "Ma! It loaded the page in<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.05 milliseconds instead of<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.1 milliseconds! I can see the difference! It's definitely faster."<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/etc etc</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe they should have put a big red R in the word turbo for racing , so that people will believe their browser goes faster .
Or they should give all their users a Type-R sticker to print out.as in : " Ma !
It loaded the page in .05 milliseconds instead of .1 milliseconds !
I can see the difference !
It 's definitely faster .
" /etc etc</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe they should have put a big red R in the word turbo for racing, so that people will believe their browser goes faster.
Or they should give all their users a Type-R sticker to print out.as in: "Ma!
It loaded the page in .05 milliseconds instead of .1 milliseconds!
I can see the difference!
It's definitely faster.
" /etc etc</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202579</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244028180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>sites not working in opera aren't opera's fault. it's the designers of those sites who see opera's low marketshare in the US and don't optimize for it. opera however is huge (just passed up IE) in russia.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>sites not working in opera are n't opera 's fault .
it 's the designers of those sites who see opera 's low marketshare in the US and do n't optimize for it .
opera however is huge ( just passed up IE ) in russia .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>sites not working in opera aren't opera's fault.
it's the designers of those sites who see opera's low marketshare in the US and don't optimize for it.
opera however is huge (just passed up IE) in russia.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28256433</id>
	<title>Re:How do you define "modern"?</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1244455080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Gaming consoles are 100\% closed platforms. There's no way for Opera to make a version for those without approval.

<p>And the DSi browser is Nintendo's call, as Opera has explained. Nintendo tells Opera what they want, Opera does it. Opera can't really make any decisions, only suggestions.

</p><p>Opera will be available for PS3 when Sony realizes that Netfront is shit and licenses Opera instead.

</p><p>YouTube support on the DSi? Hah, keep dreaming. The DSi doesn't even come close to the minimum system requirements for even Flash Lite!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Gaming consoles are 100 \ % closed platforms .
There 's no way for Opera to make a version for those without approval .
And the DSi browser is Nintendo 's call , as Opera has explained .
Nintendo tells Opera what they want , Opera does it .
Opera ca n't really make any decisions , only suggestions .
Opera will be available for PS3 when Sony realizes that Netfront is shit and licenses Opera instead .
YouTube support on the DSi ?
Hah , keep dreaming .
The DSi does n't even come close to the minimum system requirements for even Flash Lite !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Gaming consoles are 100\% closed platforms.
There's no way for Opera to make a version for those without approval.
And the DSi browser is Nintendo's call, as Opera has explained.
Nintendo tells Opera what they want, Opera does it.
Opera can't really make any decisions, only suggestions.
Opera will be available for PS3 when Sony realizes that Netfront is shit and licenses Opera instead.
YouTube support on the DSi?
Hah, keep dreaming.
The DSi doesn't even come close to the minimum system requirements for even Flash Lite!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199937</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196979</id>
	<title>Nope</title>
	<author>sakdoctor</author>
	<datestamp>1244049000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The internet is more like a plumbing trap.</p><p>People pour masses of crap down it, but occasionally you need to reach in and search for a valuable item, and you come out covered in shit.<br>What were we talking about again?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The internet is more like a plumbing trap.People pour masses of crap down it , but occasionally you need to reach in and search for a valuable item , and you come out covered in shit.What were we talking about again ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The internet is more like a plumbing trap.People pour masses of crap down it, but occasionally you need to reach in and search for a valuable item, and you come out covered in shit.What were we talking about again?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198063</id>
	<title>Re:passes an even tougher test than acid3</title>
	<author>StuartHankins</author>
	<datestamp>1244053080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>No problem here. Firefox 3.0.10 under OSX 10.4.11.<br>
Also fine with Firefox 3.0.10 under Windows XP SP3.<br>
<br>I suspect one of your addons is what's giving you the problem.</htmltext>
<tokenext>No problem here .
Firefox 3.0.10 under OSX 10.4.11 .
Also fine with Firefox 3.0.10 under Windows XP SP3 .
I suspect one of your addons is what 's giving you the problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>No problem here.
Firefox 3.0.10 under OSX 10.4.11.
Also fine with Firefox 3.0.10 under Windows XP SP3.
I suspect one of your addons is what's giving you the problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199113</id>
	<title>Now if they only suported Flash 9</title>
	<author>geekoid</author>
	<datestamp>1244057640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>on there Wii browser.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>on there Wii browser .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>on there Wii browser.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196833</id>
	<title>Re: Unclogs?</title>
	<author>SlashDotDotDot</author>
	<datestamp>1244048340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Unclogs your connection?</p></div><p>If I understand correctly, Opera Turbo only works in conjunction with specialized servers.</p><p>

<a href="http://www.opera.com/business/solutions/turbo/" title="opera.com">http://www.opera.com/business/solutions/turbo/</a> [opera.com]

</p><p>You use a proxy server while you surf.  The proxy compresses the pages (partly by reducing image quality and blocking plugin content until you click on it) and delivers the compressed version to your browser.</p><p>I have lots of questions about this.  Are there free servers available to the average consumer?  Is this an open standard?  Do the servers themselves represent a problematic bottleneck?  Anyone understand this better?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Unclogs your connection ? If I understand correctly , Opera Turbo only works in conjunction with specialized servers .
http : //www.opera.com/business/solutions/turbo/ [ opera.com ] You use a proxy server while you surf .
The proxy compresses the pages ( partly by reducing image quality and blocking plugin content until you click on it ) and delivers the compressed version to your browser.I have lots of questions about this .
Are there free servers available to the average consumer ?
Is this an open standard ?
Do the servers themselves represent a problematic bottleneck ?
Anyone understand this better ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unclogs your connection?If I understand correctly, Opera Turbo only works in conjunction with specialized servers.
http://www.opera.com/business/solutions/turbo/ [opera.com]

You use a proxy server while you surf.
The proxy compresses the pages (partly by reducing image quality and blocking plugin content until you click on it) and delivers the compressed version to your browser.I have lots of questions about this.
Are there free servers available to the average consumer?
Is this an open standard?
Do the servers themselves represent a problematic bottleneck?
Anyone understand this better?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197183</id>
	<title>Keep crying Google</title>
	<author>ubersoldat2k7</author>
	<datestamp>1244049780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>"The beta is currently available for every modern OS platform."</p></div><p>See google, it's not that hard, so stop crying about standards and get your act together. It's easier to criticize than to create.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The beta is currently available for every modern OS platform .
" See google , it 's not that hard , so stop crying about standards and get your act together .
It 's easier to criticize than to create .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The beta is currently available for every modern OS platform.
"See google, it's not that hard, so stop crying about standards and get your act together.
It's easier to criticize than to create.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206825</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244109120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For their next version, Opera should work more on a quirks mode that it can use when it detects horribly written code.  They could use Slashdot as the equivalent of the acid3 test.  Of course, since Slashdot doesn't render the same in any two browsers, they would have to implant nodes in the brains of the Slashdot developers in order to determine how the site is actually supposed to look and function.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For their next version , Opera should work more on a quirks mode that it can use when it detects horribly written code .
They could use Slashdot as the equivalent of the acid3 test .
Of course , since Slashdot does n't render the same in any two browsers , they would have to implant nodes in the brains of the Slashdot developers in order to determine how the site is actually supposed to look and function .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For their next version, Opera should work more on a quirks mode that it can use when it detects horribly written code.
They could use Slashdot as the equivalent of the acid3 test.
Of course, since Slashdot doesn't render the same in any two browsers, they would have to implant nodes in the brains of the Slashdot developers in order to determine how the site is actually supposed to look and function.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197755</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28219161</id>
	<title>Re:Opera and Adblock</title>
	<author>urecheatu007</author>
	<datestamp>1244145540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Well, Opera has Firefly which is a lot like Firebug. Just go to Tools -&gt; Advanced -&gt; Developer Tools.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , Opera has Firefly which is a lot like Firebug .
Just go to Tools - &gt; Advanced - &gt; Developer Tools .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, Opera has Firefly which is a lot like Firebug.
Just go to Tools -&gt; Advanced -&gt; Developer Tools.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206873</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196735</id>
	<title>Re: Unclogs?</title>
	<author>qoncept</author>
	<datestamp>1244048040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><nobr> <wbr></nobr></p><div class="quote"><p>... and customizable speed dial</p></div><p>Now you can get The Internet with just a regular phone line!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>... and customizable speed dialNow you can get The Internet with just a regular phone line !</tokentext>
<sentencetext> ... and customizable speed dialNow you can get The Internet with just a regular phone line!
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199989</id>
	<title>Re:passes an even tougher test than acid3</title>
	<author>hyfe</author>
	<datestamp>1244061960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Add IE7 and IE8 on Windows XP to that list.
<p>
I actually thought it was slashdot following standards and IE being rubbish, since everything was fine with Opera at home. So, I guess this means that the machine they test new changes on before rolling out is running Opera? That's a rather limited test-suite, not that I don't approve though. GO OPERA!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Add IE7 and IE8 on Windows XP to that list .
I actually thought it was slashdot following standards and IE being rubbish , since everything was fine with Opera at home .
So , I guess this means that the machine they test new changes on before rolling out is running Opera ?
That 's a rather limited test-suite , not that I do n't approve though .
GO OPERA !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Add IE7 and IE8 on Windows XP to that list.
I actually thought it was slashdot following standards and IE being rubbish, since everything was fine with Opera at home.
So, I guess this means that the machine they test new changes on before rolling out is running Opera?
That's a rather limited test-suite, not that I don't approve though.
GO OPERA!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28266619</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm</title>
	<author>hkmwbz</author>
	<datestamp>1244566200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>My biggest issues usually evolves CSS and JavaScript. AJAX sites not working or menuing on some of the Net's largest sites not working.</p></div></blockquote><p>
No such problems here.</p><blockquote><div><p>Not to mention I've seen Opera's footprint being over 700M and still growing before.</p></div></blockquote><p>
Never seen that either. Opera is much better at memory handling than Firefox and especially Chrome.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>My biggest issues usually evolves CSS and JavaScript .
AJAX sites not working or menuing on some of the Net 's largest sites not working .
No such problems here.Not to mention I 've seen Opera 's footprint being over 700M and still growing before .
Never seen that either .
Opera is much better at memory handling than Firefox and especially Chrome .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>My biggest issues usually evolves CSS and JavaScript.
AJAX sites not working or menuing on some of the Net's largest sites not working.
No such problems here.Not to mention I've seen Opera's footprint being over 700M and still growing before.
Never seen that either.
Opera is much better at memory handling than Firefox and especially Chrome.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197017</id>
	<title>Re:I really like Opera but</title>
	<author>at\_slashdot</author>
	<datestamp>1244049120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>For me the choice is simple, neither Chrome or IE8 work on Linux, and Firefox is kind of piggish on Linux, on Windows is works pretty decently. I do find Firefox a bit more compatible with some sites but Opera feels more polished and I don't have to install any extension to get it work as I want, on a clean Firefox install I have to install at least 15 extensions to make it work like Opera.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>For me the choice is simple , neither Chrome or IE8 work on Linux , and Firefox is kind of piggish on Linux , on Windows is works pretty decently .
I do find Firefox a bit more compatible with some sites but Opera feels more polished and I do n't have to install any extension to get it work as I want , on a clean Firefox install I have to install at least 15 extensions to make it work like Opera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For me the choice is simple, neither Chrome or IE8 work on Linux, and Firefox is kind of piggish on Linux, on Windows is works pretty decently.
I do find Firefox a bit more compatible with some sites but Opera feels more polished and I don't have to install any extension to get it work as I want, on a clean Firefox install I have to install at least 15 extensions to make it work like Opera.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196799</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197039</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244049180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That's what I think too. Opera 9.64 here and it looks the same as in Firefox 3.0.10 (maybe a few pixels here and there). Haven't used IE8 to visit Slashdot ever, so I might be missing something, but I've never seen that white on white problem.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's what I think too .
Opera 9.64 here and it looks the same as in Firefox 3.0.10 ( maybe a few pixels here and there ) .
Have n't used IE8 to visit Slashdot ever , so I might be missing something , but I 've never seen that white on white problem .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's what I think too.
Opera 9.64 here and it looks the same as in Firefox 3.0.10 (maybe a few pixels here and there).
Haven't used IE8 to visit Slashdot ever, so I might be missing something, but I've never seen that white on white problem.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196775</id>
	<title>Turbo Mode Information</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244048160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The link to the "Turbo Mode" was kinda weak and just went to a Changelog, so I found this article: <a href="http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/03/opera\_10\_beta\_debut/" title="theregister.co.uk">http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/03/opera\_10\_beta\_debut/</a> [theregister.co.uk] </p><p><div class="quote"><p>Dubbed Opera Turbo, the server-side technology reduces the amount of data that must be downloaded to render a given web page. It works by scaling back the size of some images and stripping out certain content types, said Opera spokesman Thomas Ford. Some content based on Adobe Flash, for example, isn't loaded unless a user clicks a button. In essence, Turbo works by establishing a proxy server through which compressed website content is funneled to the browser. It will not work with content that's encrypted using the Secure Sockets Layer protocol and delivers a benefit only when used on connections with limited bandwidth.</p></div><p>A fairly interesting concept. I wonder if Firefox is working on something like this.  Seems it would be a useful idea to explore at least for embedded devices or when you are tethered through a cell phone or whatnot.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The link to the " Turbo Mode " was kinda weak and just went to a Changelog , so I found this article : http : //www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/03/opera \ _10 \ _beta \ _debut/ [ theregister.co.uk ] Dubbed Opera Turbo , the server-side technology reduces the amount of data that must be downloaded to render a given web page .
It works by scaling back the size of some images and stripping out certain content types , said Opera spokesman Thomas Ford .
Some content based on Adobe Flash , for example , is n't loaded unless a user clicks a button .
In essence , Turbo works by establishing a proxy server through which compressed website content is funneled to the browser .
It will not work with content that 's encrypted using the Secure Sockets Layer protocol and delivers a benefit only when used on connections with limited bandwidth.A fairly interesting concept .
I wonder if Firefox is working on something like this .
Seems it would be a useful idea to explore at least for embedded devices or when you are tethered through a cell phone or whatnot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The link to the "Turbo Mode" was kinda weak and just went to a Changelog, so I found this article: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/03/opera\_10\_beta\_debut/ [theregister.co.uk] Dubbed Opera Turbo, the server-side technology reduces the amount of data that must be downloaded to render a given web page.
It works by scaling back the size of some images and stripping out certain content types, said Opera spokesman Thomas Ford.
Some content based on Adobe Flash, for example, isn't loaded unless a user clicks a button.
In essence, Turbo works by establishing a proxy server through which compressed website content is funneled to the browser.
It will not work with content that's encrypted using the Secure Sockets Layer protocol and delivers a benefit only when used on connections with limited bandwidth.A fairly interesting concept.
I wonder if Firefox is working on something like this.
Seems it would be a useful idea to explore at least for embedded devices or when you are tethered through a cell phone or whatnot.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198855</id>
	<title>Re:AdBlock Plus? NoScript?</title>
	<author>Ksevio</author>
	<datestamp>1244056500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>For NoScript, it has the ability to turn off javascript/plugins for all sites and enable it on a site by site basis.</htmltext>
<tokenext>For NoScript , it has the ability to turn off javascript/plugins for all sites and enable it on a site by site basis .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>For NoScript, it has the ability to turn off javascript/plugins for all sites and enable it on a site by site basis.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197521</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197851</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>MobileTatsu-NJG</author>
	<datestamp>1244052300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Really, Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere, like the infamous white on white comment titles.</p></div><p>Some time recently they broke it so that I cannot see the score of the post without highlighting it.  *Sigh*</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere , like the infamous white on white comment titles.Some time recently they broke it so that I can not see the score of the post without highlighting it .
* Sigh *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere, like the infamous white on white comment titles.Some time recently they broke it so that I cannot see the score of the post without highlighting it.
*Sigh*
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198981</id>
	<title>Re:AdBlock Plus? NoScript?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244057100000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Opera has been able to block ads for quite some time now.</p><p>Right click on the website, select "Block Content". It will give you a meta-interface to select elements in the page to specifically disable and block in the future. The content you choose to block can be on an individual basis or you can more be more general with wildcards for the url.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera has been able to block ads for quite some time now.Right click on the website , select " Block Content " .
It will give you a meta-interface to select elements in the page to specifically disable and block in the future .
The content you choose to block can be on an individual basis or you can more be more general with wildcards for the url .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera has been able to block ads for quite some time now.Right click on the website, select "Block Content".
It will give you a meta-interface to select elements in the page to specifically disable and block in the future.
The content you choose to block can be on an individual basis or you can more be more general with wildcards for the url.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197521</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147</id>
	<title>passes an even tougher test than acid3</title>
	<author>bcrowell</author>
	<datestamp>1244049660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>
Opera passes an even tougher css test than acid3 -- unlike firefox and safari, it renders the titles of slashdot comments correctly.
</p><p>
Yes, that's a joke.
To see what I'm talking about, use firefox or safari to navigate to the slashdot homepage, and then click on the "Read More..." link for a story in the news, science, or technology sections. (This Opera article is in the tech section, but if you have your default threshold for comments set high, like I do, you won't get any titles of comments displayed right now, simply because there aren't any highly up-moderated comments yet, so you won't get any comments displayed.) What you'll see is that the titles of stories are displayed in white on a white background.
</p><p>
<a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1253765&amp;cid=28182635" title="slashdot.org">This comment</a> [slashdot.org] explains that it's due to a CSS bug in the stylesheets in certain sections. <a href="https://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&amp;aid=2800590&amp;group\_id=4421&amp;atid=104421" title="sourceforge.net">Here</a> [sourceforge.net] is a bug report that I did today in sourceforge. I couldn't find any earlier reports of this problem by searching on sourceforge's bug tracker, but they might exist -- this problem has been around for quite some time now. As a work-around, you can click on the story's title in the threshold form.
</p><p>
It would be interested to hear whether this is universally reproducible with firefox and safari, but please be very careful to follow the exact instructions above. It depends on which section the article is in, and it depends on whether or not you're getting a cached version of the story.
</p><p>
The fact that the slashdot crew hasn't noticed this bug on their own after such a long period of time makes me wonder how much attention they really pay to the site. (This is assuming that the bug really does occur for all firefox users.) We've had dupes and grammatical mistakes in summaries forever, but now that the firehose is handling submissions, it looks like the whole site is just on autopilot.
</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera passes an even tougher css test than acid3 -- unlike firefox and safari , it renders the titles of slashdot comments correctly .
Yes , that 's a joke .
To see what I 'm talking about , use firefox or safari to navigate to the slashdot homepage , and then click on the " Read More... " link for a story in the news , science , or technology sections .
( This Opera article is in the tech section , but if you have your default threshold for comments set high , like I do , you wo n't get any titles of comments displayed right now , simply because there are n't any highly up-moderated comments yet , so you wo n't get any comments displayed .
) What you 'll see is that the titles of stories are displayed in white on a white background .
This comment [ slashdot.org ] explains that it 's due to a CSS bug in the stylesheets in certain sections .
Here [ sourceforge.net ] is a bug report that I did today in sourceforge .
I could n't find any earlier reports of this problem by searching on sourceforge 's bug tracker , but they might exist -- this problem has been around for quite some time now .
As a work-around , you can click on the story 's title in the threshold form .
It would be interested to hear whether this is universally reproducible with firefox and safari , but please be very careful to follow the exact instructions above .
It depends on which section the article is in , and it depends on whether or not you 're getting a cached version of the story .
The fact that the slashdot crew has n't noticed this bug on their own after such a long period of time makes me wonder how much attention they really pay to the site .
( This is assuming that the bug really does occur for all firefox users .
) We 've had dupes and grammatical mistakes in summaries forever , but now that the firehose is handling submissions , it looks like the whole site is just on autopilot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>
Opera passes an even tougher css test than acid3 -- unlike firefox and safari, it renders the titles of slashdot comments correctly.
Yes, that's a joke.
To see what I'm talking about, use firefox or safari to navigate to the slashdot homepage, and then click on the "Read More..." link for a story in the news, science, or technology sections.
(This Opera article is in the tech section, but if you have your default threshold for comments set high, like I do, you won't get any titles of comments displayed right now, simply because there aren't any highly up-moderated comments yet, so you won't get any comments displayed.
) What you'll see is that the titles of stories are displayed in white on a white background.
This comment [slashdot.org] explains that it's due to a CSS bug in the stylesheets in certain sections.
Here [sourceforge.net] is a bug report that I did today in sourceforge.
I couldn't find any earlier reports of this problem by searching on sourceforge's bug tracker, but they might exist -- this problem has been around for quite some time now.
As a work-around, you can click on the story's title in the threshold form.
It would be interested to hear whether this is universally reproducible with firefox and safari, but please be very careful to follow the exact instructions above.
It depends on which section the article is in, and it depends on whether or not you're getting a cached version of the story.
The fact that the slashdot crew hasn't noticed this bug on their own after such a long period of time makes me wonder how much attention they really pay to the site.
(This is assuming that the bug really does occur for all firefox users.
) We've had dupes and grammatical mistakes in summaries forever, but now that the firehose is handling submissions, it looks like the whole site is just on autopilot.
</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28204231</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244036400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>OK, just tried MLB.com in Opera 10.0. It seems to work fine, renders similarly to firefox in linux and all the menus work.</p><p>Memory is 200M on Linux with 20 tabs open and having been used all day. This is with plugins and scripting enabled. Also, not one crash, and it feels zippy and responsive.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>OK , just tried MLB.com in Opera 10.0 .
It seems to work fine , renders similarly to firefox in linux and all the menus work.Memory is 200M on Linux with 20 tabs open and having been used all day .
This is with plugins and scripting enabled .
Also , not one crash , and it feels zippy and responsive .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>OK, just tried MLB.com in Opera 10.0.
It seems to work fine, renders similarly to firefox in linux and all the menus work.Memory is 200M on Linux with 20 tabs open and having been used all day.
This is with plugins and scripting enabled.
Also, not one crash, and it feels zippy and responsive.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202619</id>
	<title>Re:Hmmm</title>
	<author>gnud</author>
	<datestamp>1244028360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Your issues evolve CSS and Javascript?<br>My issues never push web technologies forward<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</htmltext>
<tokenext>Your issues evolve CSS and Javascript ? My issues never push web technologies forward : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Your issues evolve CSS and Javascript?My issues never push web technologies forward :(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197169</id>
	<title>addons?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244049720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Does it support full-fledged, browser-integrated addons yet?</p><p>Wake me when it does.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does it support full-fledged , browser-integrated addons yet ? Wake me when it does .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Does it support full-fledged, browser-integrated addons yet?Wake me when it does.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199111</id>
	<title>Re: Unclogs?</title>
	<author>arclyte</author>
	<datestamp>1244057640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Opera's new Foaming Action Bubbles will clear away all that sticky residue from inside your intertubes that builds up after years of looking at pron.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera 's new Foaming Action Bubbles will clear away all that sticky residue from inside your intertubes that builds up after years of looking at pron .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera's new Foaming Action Bubbles will clear away all that sticky residue from inside your intertubes that builds up after years of looking at pron.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198285</id>
	<title>Big Opera Fan</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244053920000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm a big fan of Opera and it has been my primary web browser for about six or seven years now. It's light, fast and sticks to standards. I used to wish it was open source, but the Opera team does such a good job, I don't mind.</p><p>As a side note, Opera is the only web brwoser that renders<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. properly for me.</p><p>It's a very flexible, fast and secure browser and I look forward to the final version 10 release.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm a big fan of Opera and it has been my primary web browser for about six or seven years now .
It 's light , fast and sticks to standards .
I used to wish it was open source , but the Opera team does such a good job , I do n't mind.As a side note , Opera is the only web brwoser that renders / .
properly for me.It 's a very flexible , fast and secure browser and I look forward to the final version 10 release .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm a big fan of Opera and it has been my primary web browser for about six or seven years now.
It's light, fast and sticks to standards.
I used to wish it was open source, but the Opera team does such a good job, I don't mind.As a side note, Opera is the only web brwoser that renders /.
properly for me.It's a very flexible, fast and secure browser and I look forward to the final version 10 release.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28201201</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244023380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I agree.  I'm not even sure what SlashDot is supposed to look like!</p><p>In Opera, which I use 98\% of the time, you can right-click on a page and choose "validate".  Opera will upload the page to validator.w3.org and show the errors.  And those are mostly low-level- the layout mistakes, assumptions, etc., are a different story.</p><p>Heck, google.com main page has 76 errors!</p><p>I say go back to simple html for most webpages.  I'm happy to see smart phone browsers driving some simplification of html.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I agree .
I 'm not even sure what SlashDot is supposed to look like ! In Opera , which I use 98 \ % of the time , you can right-click on a page and choose " validate " .
Opera will upload the page to validator.w3.org and show the errors .
And those are mostly low-level- the layout mistakes , assumptions , etc. , are a different story.Heck , google.com main page has 76 errors ! I say go back to simple html for most webpages .
I 'm happy to see smart phone browsers driving some simplification of html .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I agree.
I'm not even sure what SlashDot is supposed to look like!In Opera, which I use 98\% of the time, you can right-click on a page and choose "validate".
Opera will upload the page to validator.w3.org and show the errors.
And those are mostly low-level- the layout mistakes, assumptions, etc., are a different story.Heck, google.com main page has 76 errors!I say go back to simple html for most webpages.
I'm happy to see smart phone browsers driving some simplification of html.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197137</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>gazbo</author>
	<datestamp>1244049600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I can confirm that with both Opera and Firefox on Linux (Fedora 10), Slashdot is completely fucked.  And they are pretty damn Slashdot-friendly combos.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I can confirm that with both Opera and Firefox on Linux ( Fedora 10 ) , Slashdot is completely fucked .
And they are pretty damn Slashdot-friendly combos .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can confirm that with both Opera and Firefox on Linux (Fedora 10), Slashdot is completely fucked.
And they are pretty damn Slashdot-friendly combos.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200305</id>
	<title>Indeed</title>
	<author>Snaller</author>
	<datestamp>1244019960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Its getting worse and less readable over the years. Alas.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Its getting worse and less readable over the years .
Alas .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Its getting worse and less readable over the years.
Alas.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28203299</id>
	<title>Re:OS X version</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244031180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Doesn't surprise me; I used Opera on my PC nearly exclusively (except on a handful of sites that demanded a "standard" browser, then it was Firefox), but I spent a scary and unfamiliar few weeks when I switched over to a Mac in 2006 trying to figure out what browser was "best" on OSX.</p><p>Opening Opera was not nearly as quick as it had been on the PC.  Websites loaded fairly fast, but a lot of stuff looked funky from how I perceived it to suppose to look.</p><p>Firefox took AGES to load, and when they updated it (I'm running 3.0 something) the functional speed also seemed to take a huge hit, unacceptable given reasonably fast Internet connections.</p><p>I eventually settled on Safari as my main browser, and fortunately I discovered Camino as a backup for additional browsing (at the time, I think that Gmail didn't play nice in Safari or something).  I still use Opera for various browsing (have thousands of bookmarks I transferred over), but mainly I use Safari.</p><p>If Opera on Mac gets up to the standards of Opera on PC (in other words, indistinguishable from  the "default" browser and its common alternatives--IE and Firefox), I might switch back.  For now, however, it's not quite as neat or streamline as Safari on a Mac.</p><p>I love the browser, though--when I switched, I believe it to be far and away the best browser out there for PCs.  I would be seriously surprised if that's changed on that platform.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Does n't surprise me ; I used Opera on my PC nearly exclusively ( except on a handful of sites that demanded a " standard " browser , then it was Firefox ) , but I spent a scary and unfamiliar few weeks when I switched over to a Mac in 2006 trying to figure out what browser was " best " on OSX.Opening Opera was not nearly as quick as it had been on the PC .
Websites loaded fairly fast , but a lot of stuff looked funky from how I perceived it to suppose to look.Firefox took AGES to load , and when they updated it ( I 'm running 3.0 something ) the functional speed also seemed to take a huge hit , unacceptable given reasonably fast Internet connections.I eventually settled on Safari as my main browser , and fortunately I discovered Camino as a backup for additional browsing ( at the time , I think that Gmail did n't play nice in Safari or something ) .
I still use Opera for various browsing ( have thousands of bookmarks I transferred over ) , but mainly I use Safari.If Opera on Mac gets up to the standards of Opera on PC ( in other words , indistinguishable from the " default " browser and its common alternatives--IE and Firefox ) , I might switch back .
For now , however , it 's not quite as neat or streamline as Safari on a Mac.I love the browser , though--when I switched , I believe it to be far and away the best browser out there for PCs .
I would be seriously surprised if that 's changed on that platform .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Doesn't surprise me; I used Opera on my PC nearly exclusively (except on a handful of sites that demanded a "standard" browser, then it was Firefox), but I spent a scary and unfamiliar few weeks when I switched over to a Mac in 2006 trying to figure out what browser was "best" on OSX.Opening Opera was not nearly as quick as it had been on the PC.
Websites loaded fairly fast, but a lot of stuff looked funky from how I perceived it to suppose to look.Firefox took AGES to load, and when they updated it (I'm running 3.0 something) the functional speed also seemed to take a huge hit, unacceptable given reasonably fast Internet connections.I eventually settled on Safari as my main browser, and fortunately I discovered Camino as a backup for additional browsing (at the time, I think that Gmail didn't play nice in Safari or something).
I still use Opera for various browsing (have thousands of bookmarks I transferred over), but mainly I use Safari.If Opera on Mac gets up to the standards of Opera on PC (in other words, indistinguishable from  the "default" browser and its common alternatives--IE and Firefox), I might switch back.
For now, however, it's not quite as neat or streamline as Safari on a Mac.I love the browser, though--when I switched, I believe it to be far and away the best browser out there for PCs.
I would be seriously surprised if that's changed on that platform.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197255</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198179</id>
	<title>Re:passes an even tougher test than acid3</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244053560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Earlier Opera 10 alphas had an issue with expanding comments in discussion threads on<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/., but it seems to have become less and less common, and the last one released before this beta hasn't done it at all for me yet.</p><p>It's even stopped jerking around when it tried to pull that useless-as-shit floaty comment sidebar around, although I'm not sure if that's Opera improving or the<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. code sucking less.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Earlier Opera 10 alphas had an issue with expanding comments in discussion threads on /. , but it seems to have become less and less common , and the last one released before this beta has n't done it at all for me yet.It 's even stopped jerking around when it tried to pull that useless-as-shit floaty comment sidebar around , although I 'm not sure if that 's Opera improving or the / .
code sucking less .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Earlier Opera 10 alphas had an issue with expanding comments in discussion threads on /., but it seems to have become less and less common, and the last one released before this beta hasn't done it at all for me yet.It's even stopped jerking around when it tried to pull that useless-as-shit floaty comment sidebar around, although I'm not sure if that's Opera improving or the /.
code sucking less.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197365</id>
	<title>No database support</title>
	<author>Snap E Tom</author>
	<datestamp>1244050500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Javascript database support isn't mentioned.  That's a bummer for those of us creating offline apps.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Javascript database support is n't mentioned .
That 's a bummer for those of us creating offline apps .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Javascript database support isn't mentioned.
That's a bummer for those of us creating offline apps.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197811</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>harryandthehenderson</author>
	<datestamp>1244052120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You guys are either exaggerating or bending the truth.</p></div><p>Or maybe, just maybe, just because you don't experience a bug that it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.  Secondly, you do realize there are more than just the singular versions of Chromium and Firefox that you use, and as such they may have differing behaviors, or that others may be using completely different browsers altogether, right?  But no, it clearly must be people making stuff up.<br> <br>  This reminds of back when the Linux kernel devs would claim their were no response issues desktop Linux because when run on servers with vastly more processors and power that there were no issues.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You guys are either exaggerating or bending the truth.Or maybe , just maybe , just because you do n't experience a bug that it does n't mean it does n't exist .
Secondly , you do realize there are more than just the singular versions of Chromium and Firefox that you use , and as such they may have differing behaviors , or that others may be using completely different browsers altogether , right ?
But no , it clearly must be people making stuff up .
This reminds of back when the Linux kernel devs would claim their were no response issues desktop Linux because when run on servers with vastly more processors and power that there were no issues .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You guys are either exaggerating or bending the truth.Or maybe, just maybe, just because you don't experience a bug that it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.
Secondly, you do realize there are more than just the singular versions of Chromium and Firefox that you use, and as such they may have differing behaviors, or that others may be using completely different browsers altogether, right?
But no, it clearly must be people making stuff up.
This reminds of back when the Linux kernel devs would claim their were no response issues desktop Linux because when run on servers with vastly more processors and power that there were no issues.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206873</id>
	<title>Re:Opera and Adblock</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244109960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can get by with Opera not having Adblock + Noscript.  They've always taken security into account more than other browsers (just as a small example, not allowing javascript to catch right-clicks by default) and I don't really pay attention to/care about ads anyway.</p><p>The one thing I really miss though is Firebug.  If there was an equivalent capability in Opera, I would never use anything else except for testing to make sure pages rendered correctly in other browsers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can get by with Opera not having Adblock + Noscript .
They 've always taken security into account more than other browsers ( just as a small example , not allowing javascript to catch right-clicks by default ) and I do n't really pay attention to/care about ads anyway.The one thing I really miss though is Firebug .
If there was an equivalent capability in Opera , I would never use anything else except for testing to make sure pages rendered correctly in other browsers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can get by with Opera not having Adblock + Noscript.
They've always taken security into account more than other browsers (just as a small example, not allowing javascript to catch right-clicks by default) and I don't really pay attention to/care about ads anyway.The one thing I really miss though is Firebug.
If there was an equivalent capability in Opera, I would never use anything else except for testing to make sure pages rendered correctly in other browsers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197963</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196733</id>
	<title>Details on the Turbo mode are in the changelogs</title>
	<author>NevarMore</author>
	<datestamp>1244047980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.opera.com/docs/changelogs/mac/1000b1/" title="opera.com">http://www.opera.com/docs/changelogs/mac/1000b1/</a> [opera.com]</p><p>"This new Opera feature increases your internet bandwidth speed on slow connections using data and image compression technologies. Opera Turbo uses Opera proxy servers to compress the traffic before it reaches the Opera browser on the client&#226;(TM)s computer; see this Opera reference. Opera Turbo can easily be configured to suit your browsing needs:"</p><p>So it basically does what their mobile browser already does for your desktop. Cue tinfoil hatters in 3,2,1...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.opera.com/docs/changelogs/mac/1000b1/ [ opera.com ] " This new Opera feature increases your internet bandwidth speed on slow connections using data and image compression technologies .
Opera Turbo uses Opera proxy servers to compress the traffic before it reaches the Opera browser on the client   ( TM ) s computer ; see this Opera reference .
Opera Turbo can easily be configured to suit your browsing needs : " So it basically does what their mobile browser already does for your desktop .
Cue tinfoil hatters in 3,2,1.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.opera.com/docs/changelogs/mac/1000b1/ [opera.com]"This new Opera feature increases your internet bandwidth speed on slow connections using data and image compression technologies.
Opera Turbo uses Opera proxy servers to compress the traffic before it reaches the Opera browser on the clientâ(TM)s computer; see this Opera reference.
Opera Turbo can easily be configured to suit your browsing needs:"So it basically does what their mobile browser already does for your desktop.
Cue tinfoil hatters in 3,2,1...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198355</id>
	<title>Re:Turbo Mode Information</title>
	<author>Jay L</author>
	<datestamp>1244054220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>It works by scaling back the size of some images and stripping out certain content types</p></div></blockquote><p>Hmm... I seem to remember AOL trying something very much like this. It made browsing significantly faster, but people hated the lower-quality recompressed images. It also turned up oodles of caching-related bugs at web sites. And, in the end, it didn't scale well unless you kept a copy of the entire Internet on your cache server.</p><p>It'll be interesting to see how much that's changed now that RAM is cheaper, and even "slow" bandwidth is faster than dialup of the time.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>It works by scaling back the size of some images and stripping out certain content typesHmm... I seem to remember AOL trying something very much like this .
It made browsing significantly faster , but people hated the lower-quality recompressed images .
It also turned up oodles of caching-related bugs at web sites .
And , in the end , it did n't scale well unless you kept a copy of the entire Internet on your cache server.It 'll be interesting to see how much that 's changed now that RAM is cheaper , and even " slow " bandwidth is faster than dialup of the time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It works by scaling back the size of some images and stripping out certain content typesHmm... I seem to remember AOL trying something very much like this.
It made browsing significantly faster, but people hated the lower-quality recompressed images.
It also turned up oodles of caching-related bugs at web sites.
And, in the end, it didn't scale well unless you kept a copy of the entire Internet on your cache server.It'll be interesting to see how much that's changed now that RAM is cheaper, and even "slow" bandwidth is faster than dialup of the time.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196775</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197423</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244050680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Show them how they should fix their code and get off your high horse, dick. There's no reason to act like that because they're not on the ball for a simple website.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Show them how they should fix their code and get off your high horse , dick .
There 's no reason to act like that because they 're not on the ball for a simple website .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Show them how they should fix their code and get off your high horse, dick.
There's no reason to act like that because they're not on the ball for a simple website.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198391</id>
	<title>Re: Unclogs?</title>
	<author>residieu</author>
	<datestamp>1244054400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>So the internet is... like a series of tubes?</p></div><p>Yes, it is. A series of tubes is a perfectly fine metaphor. A fat pipe has long been a common metaphor for a fast connection. Notice the similarity between pipes and tubes. If you have a problems with the rest of Senator Stevens's  argument, please actually address those points, rather than just bringing up this tired old quote.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>So the internet is... like a series of tubes ? Yes , it is .
A series of tubes is a perfectly fine metaphor .
A fat pipe has long been a common metaphor for a fast connection .
Notice the similarity between pipes and tubes .
If you have a problems with the rest of Senator Stevens 's argument , please actually address those points , rather than just bringing up this tired old quote .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So the internet is... like a series of tubes?Yes, it is.
A series of tubes is a perfectly fine metaphor.
A fat pipe has long been a common metaphor for a fast connection.
Notice the similarity between pipes and tubes.
If you have a problems with the rest of Senator Stevens's  argument, please actually address those points, rather than just bringing up this tired old quote.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197637</id>
	<title>Re:Turbo Mode Information</title>
	<author>WaroDaBeast</author>
	<datestamp>1244051520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Firefox doesn't block Flash content by default, but <a href="https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/433" title="mozilla.org" rel="nofollow">Flashblock</a> [mozilla.org] does and works in the same fashion as described in your quotation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Firefox does n't block Flash content by default , but Flashblock [ mozilla.org ] does and works in the same fashion as described in your quotation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Firefox doesn't block Flash content by default, but Flashblock [mozilla.org] does and works in the same fashion as described in your quotation.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196775</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200075</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Sancho</author>
	<datestamp>1244062320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They broke the UI, too.</p><p>D2 (the Ajaxified comments system) used to have handy shortcut keys for moving between comments.  It was great--I never had to touch my mouse!</p><p>Now it looks like they've added some Javascript which used to power Firehose, and they've completely clobbered the shortcut keys for navigating comments.  It's pretty annoying<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:(</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They broke the UI , too.D2 ( the Ajaxified comments system ) used to have handy shortcut keys for moving between comments .
It was great--I never had to touch my mouse ! Now it looks like they 've added some Javascript which used to power Firehose , and they 've completely clobbered the shortcut keys for navigating comments .
It 's pretty annoying : (</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They broke the UI, too.D2 (the Ajaxified comments system) used to have handy shortcut keys for moving between comments.
It was great--I never had to touch my mouse!Now it looks like they've added some Javascript which used to power Firehose, and they've completely clobbered the shortcut keys for navigating comments.
It's pretty annoying :(</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196799</id>
	<title>I really like Opera but</title>
	<author>InlawBiker</author>
	<datestamp>1244048280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I installed it and used it on my Windows &amp; Ubuntu machines and really liked Opera.  It's clean and fast, and I love the sync option.  For some reason I have trouble committing to it.  I also liked the speed of Chrome and, God help me, IE8.   I know they're great browsers but I guess I'm just happy with Firefox.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I installed it and used it on my Windows &amp; Ubuntu machines and really liked Opera .
It 's clean and fast , and I love the sync option .
For some reason I have trouble committing to it .
I also liked the speed of Chrome and , God help me , IE8 .
I know they 're great browsers but I guess I 'm just happy with Firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I installed it and used it on my Windows &amp; Ubuntu machines and really liked Opera.
It's clean and fast, and I love the sync option.
For some reason I have trouble committing to it.
I also liked the speed of Chrome and, God help me, IE8.
I know they're great browsers but I guess I'm just happy with Firefox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199939</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>cgenman</author>
	<datestamp>1244061780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Opera 9.60 here.  The main problems I have are</p><p>1: story titles showing up as dark grey on the dark green title bars in opera<br>2: floating comment bar on the left, frequently floating way over things it shouldn't<br>3: (unrelated to Opera, and probably standards-compliant) the floating divs covering up content on smaller screens, like the iphone</p><p>Personally, for the next version fo Slashdot I'd dump the dynamically floating divs, dump the fancy / fragile display techs, and just rely on a more traditional layout system.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera 9.60 here .
The main problems I have are1 : story titles showing up as dark grey on the dark green title bars in opera2 : floating comment bar on the left , frequently floating way over things it shouldn't3 : ( unrelated to Opera , and probably standards-compliant ) the floating divs covering up content on smaller screens , like the iphonePersonally , for the next version fo Slashdot I 'd dump the dynamically floating divs , dump the fancy / fragile display techs , and just rely on a more traditional layout system .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera 9.60 here.
The main problems I have are1: story titles showing up as dark grey on the dark green title bars in opera2: floating comment bar on the left, frequently floating way over things it shouldn't3: (unrelated to Opera, and probably standards-compliant) the floating divs covering up content on smaller screens, like the iphonePersonally, for the next version fo Slashdot I'd dump the dynamically floating divs, dump the fancy / fragile display techs, and just rely on a more traditional layout system.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199291</id>
	<title>Re:How do you define "modern"?</title>
	<author>Actually, I do RTFA</author>
	<datestamp>1244058600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p> <i>"The beta is currently available for every modern OS platform."</i> </p><p>Really? Says who? </p></div> </blockquote><p>The list of supported OSes (so sayth Opera):
</p><ol>
<li>Windows
</li><li>Mac OS X
</li><li>Linux x86 64
</li><li>Linux PowerPC
</li><li>Linux i386
</li><li>FreeBSD i386
</li><li>FreeBSD AMD64
</li><li>Solaris Sparc
</li><li>Solaris Intel
</li><li>QNX
</li><li>OS/2
</li></ol><p>Sorry, no AmigaOS</p><p>
BeOS</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The beta is currently available for every modern OS platform .
" Really ?
Says who ?
The list of supported OSes ( so sayth Opera ) : Windows Mac OS X Linux x86 64 Linux PowerPC Linux i386 FreeBSD i386 FreeBSD AMD64 Solaris Sparc Solaris Intel QNX OS/2 Sorry , no AmigaOS BeOS</tokentext>
<sentencetext> "The beta is currently available for every modern OS platform.
" Really?
Says who?
The list of supported OSes (so sayth Opera):

Windows
Mac OS X
Linux x86 64
Linux PowerPC
Linux i386
FreeBSD i386
FreeBSD AMD64
Solaris Sparc
Solaris Intel
QNX
OS/2
Sorry, no AmigaOS
BeOS
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196795</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200119</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>mlong</author>
	<datestamp>1244062440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The line that chokes up firefox is from
<a href="http://c.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css?T\_2\_5\_0\_258b" title="fsdn.com">http://c.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css?T\_2\_5\_0\_258b</a> [fsdn.com] <br> <br><nobr> <wbr></nobr>.comment div.title {<br>
background:#FFFFFF none repeat scroll 0 0 !important;<br>
}

If that line is deleted (like with firebug), everything looks fine.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The line that chokes up firefox is from http : //c.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css ? T \ _2 \ _5 \ _0 \ _258b [ fsdn.com ] .comment div.title { background : # FFFFFF none repeat scroll 0 0 ! important ; } If that line is deleted ( like with firebug ) , everything looks fine .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The line that chokes up firefox is from
http://c.fsdn.com/sd/idlecore-tidied.css?T\_2\_5\_0\_258b [fsdn.com]   .comment div.title {
background:#FFFFFF none repeat scroll 0 0 !important;
}

If that line is deleted (like with firebug), everything looks fine.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197233</id>
	<title>Brilliant!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244049960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>from TFS:<br> <br>

In addition to the browser's known features, like mouse gestures, <b>keyboard shortcuts</b>, voice navigation, mail and RSS support, speed dial and so forth[...]</p></div><p>Yes, keyboards are becoming ubiquitous.  Who'd have thunk?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>from TFS : In addition to the browser 's known features , like mouse gestures , keyboard shortcuts , voice navigation , mail and RSS support , speed dial and so forth [ ... ] Yes , keyboards are becoming ubiquitous .
Who 'd have thunk ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>from TFS: 

In addition to the browser's known features, like mouse gestures, keyboard shortcuts, voice navigation, mail and RSS support, speed dial and so forth[...]Yes, keyboards are becoming ubiquitous.
Who'd have thunk?
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198551</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244055000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I was going to write something similar.  I use Opera exclusively because of the mouse gestures and the mail client, but<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. is bloody hard to read on Opera with title text rendering in a similar colour to the green bar behind it.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. is one of the few pages that is hard to read with Opera.  Can't the html wizard at<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. fix this?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I was going to write something similar .
I use Opera exclusively because of the mouse gestures and the mail client , but / .
is bloody hard to read on Opera with title text rendering in a similar colour to the green bar behind it .
/. is one of the few pages that is hard to read with Opera .
Ca n't the html wizard at / .
fix this ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I was going to write something similar.
I use Opera exclusively because of the mouse gestures and the mail client, but /.
is bloody hard to read on Opera with title text rendering in a similar colour to the green bar behind it.
/. is one of the few pages that is hard to read with Opera.
Can't the html wizard at /.
fix this?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198881</id>
	<title>Try first, then diss</title>
	<author>Krokz</author>
	<datestamp>1244056680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use Opera since way back and I convinced a lot of my more computer educated friends to use it to... but last years was a pain. A lot of sites did not render well on Opera 9.x and I had to use snail FireFox for them.

Opera 10 Alpha worked well dough, last half a year I used it instead of Firefox for sites that did not render correctly. 99.99\% of sites I tried were rendered well and now that its status is beta I officially switched beta for my main browser. It works surprisingly good, integrated spell check is amazing and some of the old features that I had to enable/change them with editing<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.ini files are configurable now via GUI. And I have no idea why you folks diss Opera add-block, it works for long time as someone already mentioned, and it works good.

The only other browser I tried and was as good as Opera was Chrome, mainly because of it amazing speed and Opera failed on some Google Aps (no way of using spreadsheets with Opera 9.x).


Short story, stop dissing Opera, most of the critics here are gone with version 10 so try it first.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use Opera since way back and I convinced a lot of my more computer educated friends to use it to... but last years was a pain .
A lot of sites did not render well on Opera 9.x and I had to use snail FireFox for them .
Opera 10 Alpha worked well dough , last half a year I used it instead of Firefox for sites that did not render correctly .
99.99 \ % of sites I tried were rendered well and now that its status is beta I officially switched beta for my main browser .
It works surprisingly good , integrated spell check is amazing and some of the old features that I had to enable/change them with editing .ini files are configurable now via GUI .
And I have no idea why you folks diss Opera add-block , it works for long time as someone already mentioned , and it works good .
The only other browser I tried and was as good as Opera was Chrome , mainly because of it amazing speed and Opera failed on some Google Aps ( no way of using spreadsheets with Opera 9.x ) .
Short story , stop dissing Opera , most of the critics here are gone with version 10 so try it first .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use Opera since way back and I convinced a lot of my more computer educated friends to use it to... but last years was a pain.
A lot of sites did not render well on Opera 9.x and I had to use snail FireFox for them.
Opera 10 Alpha worked well dough, last half a year I used it instead of Firefox for sites that did not render correctly.
99.99\% of sites I tried were rendered well and now that its status is beta I officially switched beta for my main browser.
It works surprisingly good, integrated spell check is amazing and some of the old features that I had to enable/change them with editing .ini files are configurable now via GUI.
And I have no idea why you folks diss Opera add-block, it works for long time as someone already mentioned, and it works good.
The only other browser I tried and was as good as Opera was Chrome, mainly because of it amazing speed and Opera failed on some Google Aps (no way of using spreadsheets with Opera 9.x).
Short story, stop dissing Opera, most of the critics here are gone with version 10 so try it first.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135</id>
	<title>Hmmm</title>
	<author>C\_Kode</author>
	<datestamp>1244049600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I've been a big fan of Opera for a long time, but I'm growing more and more disappointed in it.  First off, I have 9.64 and I get an 85 on the ACID3 test, but that isn't my biggest issue.  My biggest issues usually evolves CSS and JavaScript.  AJAX sites not working or menuing on some of the Net's largest sites not working. (forget using MLB.com)  Not to mention I've seen Opera's footprint being over 700M and still growing before.  Granted I had more than a few tabs, but that is ridiculous!  It's currently 215M while FF3 is 250M which I find acceptable, but that isn't always the case.  (I use both browsers at the sametime)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been a big fan of Opera for a long time , but I 'm growing more and more disappointed in it .
First off , I have 9.64 and I get an 85 on the ACID3 test , but that is n't my biggest issue .
My biggest issues usually evolves CSS and JavaScript .
AJAX sites not working or menuing on some of the Net 's largest sites not working .
( forget using MLB.com ) Not to mention I 've seen Opera 's footprint being over 700M and still growing before .
Granted I had more than a few tabs , but that is ridiculous !
It 's currently 215M while FF3 is 250M which I find acceptable , but that is n't always the case .
( I use both browsers at the sametime )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been a big fan of Opera for a long time, but I'm growing more and more disappointed in it.
First off, I have 9.64 and I get an 85 on the ACID3 test, but that isn't my biggest issue.
My biggest issues usually evolves CSS and JavaScript.
AJAX sites not working or menuing on some of the Net's largest sites not working.
(forget using MLB.com)  Not to mention I've seen Opera's footprint being over 700M and still growing before.
Granted I had more than a few tabs, but that is ridiculous!
It's currently 215M while FF3 is 250M which I find acceptable, but that isn't always the case.
(I use both browsers at the sametime)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197597</id>
	<title>Re:passes an even tougher test than acid3</title>
	<author>Remus Shepherd</author>
	<datestamp>1244051400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I am using Firefox 3.0.10 right now, and I see no problem at all on Slashdot.  Not the front page, not the comments, not in the sections which you describe.  It seems to work whether or not I'm logged in, so it has nothing to do with my display settings.</p><p>I'm sure it's broken for some people.  But I think this display bug is much more uncommon than you believe.</p><p>I wonder if it has anything to do with Add-ons?  I have none, zero, as I'm not allowed to install them here at work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I am using Firefox 3.0.10 right now , and I see no problem at all on Slashdot .
Not the front page , not the comments , not in the sections which you describe .
It seems to work whether or not I 'm logged in , so it has nothing to do with my display settings.I 'm sure it 's broken for some people .
But I think this display bug is much more uncommon than you believe.I wonder if it has anything to do with Add-ons ?
I have none , zero , as I 'm not allowed to install them here at work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I am using Firefox 3.0.10 right now, and I see no problem at all on Slashdot.
Not the front page, not the comments, not in the sections which you describe.
It seems to work whether or not I'm logged in, so it has nothing to do with my display settings.I'm sure it's broken for some people.
But I think this display bug is much more uncommon than you believe.I wonder if it has anything to do with Add-ons?
I have none, zero, as I'm not allowed to install them here at work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198677</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244055540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>how about you post a screenie how you think<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/. should look like? it looks like this :
<br>
<a href="http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/9100/clipboard01sjl.jpg" title="imageshack.us">http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/9100/clipboard01sjl.jpg</a> [imageshack.us]
<br>
under Opera.</htmltext>
<tokenext>how about you post a screenie how you think / .
should look like ?
it looks like this : http : //img192.imageshack.us/img192/9100/clipboard01sjl.jpg [ imageshack.us ] under Opera .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>how about you post a screenie how you think /.
should look like?
it looks like this :

http://img192.imageshack.us/img192/9100/clipboard01sjl.jpg [imageshack.us]

under Opera.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28204033</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Twinbee</author>
	<datestamp>1244034960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Help &amp; Preferences -&gt; Classic Index -&gt; General -&gt; Layout -&gt; Use Classic Index</p><p>Fixed it for me.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Help &amp; Preferences - &gt; Classic Index - &gt; General - &gt; Layout - &gt; Use Classic IndexFixed it for me .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Help &amp; Preferences -&gt; Classic Index -&gt; General -&gt; Layout -&gt; Use Classic IndexFixed it for me.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197755</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197847</id>
	<title>Re:Slashdot Looks Like Shit in Opera</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244052300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><i>Really, Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere, like the infamous white on white comment titles.</i></p><p><i>I guess that means that for all the talk and the bullshit, Slashdot totally hypocritical when it comes to standards.</i></p><p><i>Fix your fucking code or get off your high horse.</i></p><p>OK, Are you listening, Sid? Sid???? <a href="http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1252303&amp;cid=28168703" title="slashdot.org" rel="nofollow"> Ewwwww, yech -<b>SIDNEY, put that thing away and wash your hands before you touch the conmpany keyboard again!!!</b> </a> [slashdot.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Really , Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere , like the infamous white on white comment titles.I guess that means that for all the talk and the bullshit , Slashdot totally hypocritical when it comes to standards.Fix your fucking code or get off your high horse.OK , Are you listening , Sid ?
Sid ? ? ? ? Ewwwww , yech -SIDNEY , put that thing away and wash your hands before you touch the conmpany keyboard again ! ! !
[ slashdot.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Really, Slashdot looks like shit in most browsers with blatantly obvious bugs everywhere, like the infamous white on white comment titles.I guess that means that for all the talk and the bullshit, Slashdot totally hypocritical when it comes to standards.Fix your fucking code or get off your high horse.OK, Are you listening, Sid?
Sid????  Ewwwww, yech -SIDNEY, put that thing away and wash your hands before you touch the conmpany keyboard again!!!
[slashdot.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196631</id>
	<title>Current Presto &amp; Webkit Score 100/100</title>
	<author>eldavojohn</author>
	<datestamp>1244047680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Opera 10 continues to follow the web standards by getting 100/100 and pixel-perfect scores on the Acid3 test.</p></div><p>Yeah, I think <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acid3#Desktop\_browsers" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">anything running the latest versions of Presto (Opera) &amp; Webkit (Safari, Chrome)</a> [wikipedia.org] are getting 100s.  Two nights ago I put the latest and greatest Chrome in WinXP SP3 on my eeePC and got a 100/100 even though it said Linktest failed.  <br> <br>

Odd thing is that the more popular a browser or layout engine is, the worse it seems to do on the Acid tests!</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Opera 10 continues to follow the web standards by getting 100/100 and pixel-perfect scores on the Acid3 test.Yeah , I think anything running the latest versions of Presto ( Opera ) &amp; Webkit ( Safari , Chrome ) [ wikipedia.org ] are getting 100s .
Two nights ago I put the latest and greatest Chrome in WinXP SP3 on my eeePC and got a 100/100 even though it said Linktest failed .
Odd thing is that the more popular a browser or layout engine is , the worse it seems to do on the Acid tests !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Opera 10 continues to follow the web standards by getting 100/100 and pixel-perfect scores on the Acid3 test.Yeah, I think anything running the latest versions of Presto (Opera) &amp; Webkit (Safari, Chrome) [wikipedia.org] are getting 100s.
Two nights ago I put the latest and greatest Chrome in WinXP SP3 on my eeePC and got a 100/100 even though it said Linktest failed.
Odd thing is that the more popular a browser or layout engine is, the worse it seems to do on the Acid tests!
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196795</id>
	<title>How do you define "modern"?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1244048280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Funny</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><i>"The beta is currently available for every modern OS platform."</i>
<br> <br>
Really? Says who? I can't find any such statement on Operas site, and if it's true - where's the build for AmigaOS 4.1?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" The beta is currently available for every modern OS platform .
" Really ?
Says who ?
I ca n't find any such statement on Operas site , and if it 's true - where 's the build for AmigaOS 4.1 ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The beta is currently available for every modern OS platform.
"
 
Really?
Says who?
I can't find any such statement on Operas site, and if it's true - where's the build for AmigaOS 4.1?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199365</id>
	<title>Re:OS X version</title>
	<author>Actually, I do RTFA</author>
	<datestamp>1244059020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Unlike Google, when Opera says something is a beta, they mean it.  I'd check it out when it comes out of beta.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Unlike Google , when Opera says something is a beta , they mean it .
I 'd check it out when it comes out of beta .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Unlike Google, when Opera says something is a beta, they mean it.
I'd check it out when it comes out of beta.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197255</parent>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199291
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199937
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28256433
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198179
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197637
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28207629
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_44</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197233
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200019
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197735
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_58</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198723
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_51</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206825
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197525
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_65</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196807
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202443
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_36</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196959
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_41</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197597
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197311
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199243
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197963
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206873
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28219161
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200075
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199939
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_66</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_57</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28201201
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_56</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197493
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_47</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196979
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_63</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28204231
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197851
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28204297
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198175
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198391
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_55</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197513
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_60</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197811
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_45</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28256369
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197521
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197429
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_50</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196735
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197137
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28204033
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199023
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_48</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196833
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28203373
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_39</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199365
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_42</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198355
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_67</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197255
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28203299
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_38</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198551
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202579
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197521
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202971
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197755
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202217
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196799
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197017
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206163
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_59</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198697
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197879
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_64</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197709
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_37</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197839
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_40</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198677
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200119
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_54</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206113
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197521
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198981
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_61</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28266619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202619
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197847
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196775
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198835
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197423
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_46</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196795
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197349
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_62</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198305
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_53</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28203855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_49</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198063
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_52</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199989
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_43</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196925
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_06_03_159249_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197039
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197147
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198179
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197513
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197597
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198063
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199989
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198313
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197493
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198697
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197183
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196631
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197191
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197135
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199243
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202579
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28207629
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206113
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28266619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202619
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28204231
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199349
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196799
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197017
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206163
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198723
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202329
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196807
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202443
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197233
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200019
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199765
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196667
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196677
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198677
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196889
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197755
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206825
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28204033
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202217
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197039
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197137
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197811
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28203855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200119
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198551
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198305
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197851
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196925
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199023
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197423
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28200075
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199939
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28201201
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197525
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199139
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197847
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196733
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197255
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28204297
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199365
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28256369
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28203299
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196663
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197521
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198981
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28202971
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198855
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198285
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196775
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198835
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198355
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197637
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197169
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196659
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197311
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196979
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198175
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197879
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28198391
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196735
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197429
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196833
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196959
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28203373
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199111
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28196795
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197709
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197349
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199291
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28199937
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28256433
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197839
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_06_03_159249.21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28197963
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28206873
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_06_03_159249.28219161
</commentlist>
</conversation>
