<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article09_07_02_236258</id>
	<title>HTML Tags For Academic Printing?</title>
	<author>timothy</author>
	<datestamp>1246545540000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>meketrefi writes <i>"It's been quite a while since I got interested in the idea of using html (instead of .doc. or .odf) as a standard for saving documents &mdash; including the more official ones like academic papers. The problem is using HTML to create pages with a stable size that would deal with bibliographical references, page breaks, different printers, etc. Does anyone think it is possible to develop a decent tag like 'div,' but called 'page,' specially for this? Something that would make no use of CSS? Maybe something with attributes as follows: <tt>{page size="A4" borders="2.5cm,2.5cm,2cm,2cm" page\_numbering="bottomleft,startfrom0"}</tt> &mdash; You get the idea... <tt>{ /page}</tt> I guess you would not be able to tell when the page would be full, so the browser would have to be in charge of breaking the content into multiple pages when needed. Bibliographical references would probably need a special tag as well, positioned inside the tag ..."</i> Is this such a crazy idea? What would you advise?</htmltext>
<tokenext>meketrefi writes " It 's been quite a while since I got interested in the idea of using html ( instead of .doc .
or .odf ) as a standard for saving documents    including the more official ones like academic papers .
The problem is using HTML to create pages with a stable size that would deal with bibliographical references , page breaks , different printers , etc .
Does anyone think it is possible to develop a decent tag like 'div, ' but called 'page, ' specially for this ?
Something that would make no use of CSS ?
Maybe something with attributes as follows : { page size = " A4 " borders = " 2.5cm,2.5cm,2cm,2cm " page \ _numbering = " bottomleft,startfrom0 " }    You get the idea... { /page } I guess you would not be able to tell when the page would be full , so the browser would have to be in charge of breaking the content into multiple pages when needed .
Bibliographical references would probably need a special tag as well , positioned inside the tag ... " Is this such a crazy idea ?
What would you advise ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>meketrefi writes "It's been quite a while since I got interested in the idea of using html (instead of .doc.
or .odf) as a standard for saving documents — including the more official ones like academic papers.
The problem is using HTML to create pages with a stable size that would deal with bibliographical references, page breaks, different printers, etc.
Does anyone think it is possible to develop a decent tag like 'div,' but called 'page,' specially for this?
Something that would make no use of CSS?
Maybe something with attributes as follows: {page size="A4" borders="2.5cm,2.5cm,2cm,2cm" page\_numbering="bottomleft,startfrom0"} — You get the idea... { /page} I guess you would not be able to tell when the page would be full, so the browser would have to be in charge of breaking the content into multiple pages when needed.
Bibliographical references would probably need a special tag as well, positioned inside the tag ..." Is this such a crazy idea?
What would you advise?</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246549620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You seem to be talking about LaTex. It already exists. Don't reinvent it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Another alternative is RTF, which is a sister SGML language of HTML. While it may have drawbacks, it would accomplish most if not all of what is required.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You seem to be talking about LaTex .
It already exists .
Do n't reinvent it.Another alternative is RTF , which is a sister SGML language of HTML .
While it may have drawbacks , it would accomplish most if not all of what is required .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You seem to be talking about LaTex.
It already exists.
Don't reinvent it.Another alternative is RTF, which is a sister SGML language of HTML.
While it may have drawbacks, it would accomplish most if not all of what is required.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567873</id>
	<title>Anonymous Coward</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246551540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yeah, seriously?  This is not a valid slashdot article.  PDF and numerous other formats exist for a reason.  Why reinvent the wheel, there was no reasons stated in this article why any of the other, very popular open standards for documents couldn't be used.</p><p>Ugh... who submits these articles?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah , seriously ?
This is not a valid slashdot article .
PDF and numerous other formats exist for a reason .
Why reinvent the wheel , there was no reasons stated in this article why any of the other , very popular open standards for documents could n't be used.Ugh... who submits these articles ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah, seriously?
This is not a valid slashdot article.
PDF and numerous other formats exist for a reason.
Why reinvent the wheel, there was no reasons stated in this article why any of the other, very popular open standards for documents couldn't be used.Ugh... who submits these articles?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568195</id>
	<title>Which paper size?</title>
	<author>TalkingToes</author>
	<datestamp>1246554240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What size paper would we all agree upon? You listed "A4", I like "Letter". Close in size, but different. Get the world to agree, and maybe you have you wish one step closer. I'd not vote for "Business Card" sized.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What size paper would we all agree upon ?
You listed " A4 " , I like " Letter " .
Close in size , but different .
Get the world to agree , and maybe you have you wish one step closer .
I 'd not vote for " Business Card " sized .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What size paper would we all agree upon?
You listed "A4", I like "Letter".
Close in size, but different.
Get the world to agree, and maybe you have you wish one step closer.
I'd not vote for "Business Card" sized.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568227</id>
	<title>yes, it's a crazy idea.</title>
	<author>porky\_pig\_jr</author>
	<datestamp>1246554660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is exactly what HTML was *not* intended to be. We're talking about viewing of a document, with different browsers. No standard display is guaranteed, no matter what you try. For academic documents use software like LaTeX, and create a PDF file, or, use MIcrosoft and create doc file, or whatever. I remember reading somewhere discussion why LaTeX cannot be mapped exactly to HTML (may be it was TeX faq, not sure), and that was pretty much it. Different goals in either case.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is exactly what HTML was * not * intended to be .
We 're talking about viewing of a document , with different browsers .
No standard display is guaranteed , no matter what you try .
For academic documents use software like LaTeX , and create a PDF file , or , use MIcrosoft and create doc file , or whatever .
I remember reading somewhere discussion why LaTeX can not be mapped exactly to HTML ( may be it was TeX faq , not sure ) , and that was pretty much it .
Different goals in either case .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is exactly what HTML was *not* intended to be.
We're talking about viewing of a document, with different browsers.
No standard display is guaranteed, no matter what you try.
For academic documents use software like LaTeX, and create a PDF file, or, use MIcrosoft and create doc file, or whatever.
I remember reading somewhere discussion why LaTeX cannot be mapped exactly to HTML (may be it was TeX faq, not sure), and that was pretty much it.
Different goals in either case.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568325</id>
	<title>Themes</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246555620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I had the same idea as the OP, while looking I found LaTeX and I find it quite perfect for writing pretty much anything, however there is one point which makes it mostly unusable for normal people: themes.</p><p>While writing in LaTeX is easy and powerful, in order to theme (typeset?) a document you have to suffer quite a bit: read docs, learn lots of stuff etc. I believe what the OP wants is to be able to easily write documents (HTML) but also, easy to create a presentation (CSS), think about it: CSS is easy, simple and clean and it could be an awesome companion to something like LaTeX or any other markup language. There are a lot of styles for LaTeX that allow to create a bunch of document kinds, however when you want to customize some part of the presentation (like: add a section with a little image to the right and a yellow border) you are in a world of hurt.</p><p>I have yet to find an easy way to create print documents and have a good control over the presentation. So far the closest thing are word processors, but I hate the broken visual editing (I prefer to stick with good old code syntax).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I had the same idea as the OP , while looking I found LaTeX and I find it quite perfect for writing pretty much anything , however there is one point which makes it mostly unusable for normal people : themes.While writing in LaTeX is easy and powerful , in order to theme ( typeset ?
) a document you have to suffer quite a bit : read docs , learn lots of stuff etc .
I believe what the OP wants is to be able to easily write documents ( HTML ) but also , easy to create a presentation ( CSS ) , think about it : CSS is easy , simple and clean and it could be an awesome companion to something like LaTeX or any other markup language .
There are a lot of styles for LaTeX that allow to create a bunch of document kinds , however when you want to customize some part of the presentation ( like : add a section with a little image to the right and a yellow border ) you are in a world of hurt.I have yet to find an easy way to create print documents and have a good control over the presentation .
So far the closest thing are word processors , but I hate the broken visual editing ( I prefer to stick with good old code syntax ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I had the same idea as the OP, while looking I found LaTeX and I find it quite perfect for writing pretty much anything, however there is one point which makes it mostly unusable for normal people: themes.While writing in LaTeX is easy and powerful, in order to theme (typeset?
) a document you have to suffer quite a bit: read docs, learn lots of stuff etc.
I believe what the OP wants is to be able to easily write documents (HTML) but also, easy to create a presentation (CSS), think about it: CSS is easy, simple and clean and it could be an awesome companion to something like LaTeX or any other markup language.
There are a lot of styles for LaTeX that allow to create a bunch of document kinds, however when you want to customize some part of the presentation (like: add a section with a little image to the right and a yellow border) you are in a world of hurt.I have yet to find an easy way to create print documents and have a good control over the presentation.
So far the closest thing are word processors, but I hate the broken visual editing (I prefer to stick with good old code syntax).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570607</id>
	<title>don't forget about groff</title>
	<author>fishtorte</author>
	<datestamp>1246629240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><a href="http://www.gnu.org/software/groff/" title="gnu.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.gnu.org/software/groff/</a> [gnu.org]<br><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groff\_(software)" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groff\_(software)</a> [wikipedia.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //www.gnu.org/software/groff/ [ gnu.org ] http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groff \ _ ( software ) [ wikipedia.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://www.gnu.org/software/groff/ [gnu.org]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Groff\_(software) [wikipedia.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571547</id>
	<title>Both XHTML and LATEX work</title>
	<author>sanguisdex</author>
	<datestamp>1246635300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>One the above post talking about LATEX is right.
but if you don't want to learn a hole new standard. you could read this
<a href="http://www.alistapart.com/articles/boom" title="alistapart.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.alistapart.com/articles/boom</a> [alistapart.com]
it all about printer style sheets.
One cool thing about HTML that latext does not have is the auto type media extensions.
you can redefine the look of you content with a specific style sheet.  And while I can do all that with LATEX  I have to run it through a processor first.  bot that multi media marrett and if you want to get into really complex type setting issues LATEX is the way to go.  if you just want to use it as a word processor I would suggest using some sort of WYSIWYG for it and have a pdf printer.</htmltext>
<tokenext>One the above post talking about LATEX is right .
but if you do n't want to learn a hole new standard .
you could read this http : //www.alistapart.com/articles/boom [ alistapart.com ] it all about printer style sheets .
One cool thing about HTML that latext does not have is the auto type media extensions .
you can redefine the look of you content with a specific style sheet .
And while I can do all that with LATEX I have to run it through a processor first .
bot that multi media marrett and if you want to get into really complex type setting issues LATEX is the way to go .
if you just want to use it as a word processor I would suggest using some sort of WYSIWYG for it and have a pdf printer .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>One the above post talking about LATEX is right.
but if you don't want to learn a hole new standard.
you could read this
http://www.alistapart.com/articles/boom [alistapart.com]
it all about printer style sheets.
One cool thing about HTML that latext does not have is the auto type media extensions.
you can redefine the look of you content with a specific style sheet.
And while I can do all that with LATEX  I have to run it through a processor first.
bot that multi media marrett and if you want to get into really complex type setting issues LATEX is the way to go.
if you just want to use it as a word processor I would suggest using some sort of WYSIWYG for it and have a pdf printer.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568973</id>
	<title>Re:texexplorer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246564500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There is LatexMathML though.</p><p>http://math.etsu.edu/LaTeXMathML/</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There is LatexMathML though.http : //math.etsu.edu/LaTeXMathML/</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There is LatexMathML though.http://math.etsu.edu/LaTeXMathML/</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568115</id>
	<title>RDFa to model bibliographical data</title>
	<author>TwistedPants</author>
	<datestamp>1246553520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Don't reinvent, as so many have already said.

CSS works for print media, LaTeX works wonderfully, pdfs work wonderfully.

RDFa lets you really define the semantics of anything - People, Businesses, Biliographic data in a workable way.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Do n't reinvent , as so many have already said .
CSS works for print media , LaTeX works wonderfully , pdfs work wonderfully .
RDFa lets you really define the semantics of anything - People , Businesses , Biliographic data in a workable way .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Don't reinvent, as so many have already said.
CSS works for print media, LaTeX works wonderfully, pdfs work wonderfully.
RDFa lets you really define the semantics of anything - People, Businesses, Biliographic data in a workable way.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567729</id>
	<title>Static Page Feeds are available</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246549980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Static configurations are available already, not the intelligent ones being requested.  Has sufficed for what I needed:</p><p>

To have print page break add: &lt;p style="page-break-before: always"&gt;

</p><p>Also, to hide odd font and underline for links:</p><p>

&lt;STYLE TYPE="text/css" MEDIA=print&gt; &lt;!-- A { text-decoration: none; color: black } --&gt; &lt;/STYLE&gt;

</p><p>Yes, they have to be massaged a little.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Static configurations are available already , not the intelligent ones being requested .
Has sufficed for what I needed : To have print page break add : Also , to hide odd font and underline for links : Yes , they have to be massaged a little .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Static configurations are available already, not the intelligent ones being requested.
Has sufficed for what I needed:

To have print page break add: 

Also, to hide odd font and underline for links:

  

Yes, they have to be massaged a little.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571349</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>maxume</author>
	<datestamp>1246634220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Most word processors have good support for creating structured documents. They also make it straightforward to create a giant mash of custom styled text, which most users do (this is what I do, but I see why it is stupid and I would move away from it if I had a large project in front of me).</p><p>Font support hasn't been an issue for a long time (basically since Windows 2000 for windows people, Linux is probably more complicated, but it looks like freetype2 made most fonts available, starting, at the latest, in 2002).</p><p>I'm not going to say anything dumb about typography, but high end word processors generally have pretty decent layout engines.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Most word processors have good support for creating structured documents .
They also make it straightforward to create a giant mash of custom styled text , which most users do ( this is what I do , but I see why it is stupid and I would move away from it if I had a large project in front of me ) .Font support has n't been an issue for a long time ( basically since Windows 2000 for windows people , Linux is probably more complicated , but it looks like freetype2 made most fonts available , starting , at the latest , in 2002 ) .I 'm not going to say anything dumb about typography , but high end word processors generally have pretty decent layout engines .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Most word processors have good support for creating structured documents.
They also make it straightforward to create a giant mash of custom styled text, which most users do (this is what I do, but I see why it is stupid and I would move away from it if I had a large project in front of me).Font support hasn't been an issue for a long time (basically since Windows 2000 for windows people, Linux is probably more complicated, but it looks like freetype2 made most fonts available, starting, at the latest, in 2002).I'm not going to say anything dumb about typography, but high end word processors generally have pretty decent layout engines.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567823</id>
	<title>what do you want to do?</title>
	<author>jipn4</author>
	<datestamp>1246551060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want to save the source form or markup, use a language designed for it: LaTeX.  LaTeX lets you represent all the things you would want to represent in an academic paper, it's fairly readable, very widespread, and has tons of tools.  And LaTeX converts to both HTML and PDF.</p><p>If you want to display on the web, use HTML.  It's meant for the web.  It's not a good representation for paged media.  If you must represent paged media, you need to use CSS or XSL, but you probably don't want to.</p><p>If you want archival quality paged representations, PDF is the only game in town really.  HTML with CSS doesn't come close.  But it doesn't make sense to save your own papers only in PDF because PDF is not really editable and doesn't have the semantic information.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to save the source form or markup , use a language designed for it : LaTeX .
LaTeX lets you represent all the things you would want to represent in an academic paper , it 's fairly readable , very widespread , and has tons of tools .
And LaTeX converts to both HTML and PDF.If you want to display on the web , use HTML .
It 's meant for the web .
It 's not a good representation for paged media .
If you must represent paged media , you need to use CSS or XSL , but you probably do n't want to.If you want archival quality paged representations , PDF is the only game in town really .
HTML with CSS does n't come close .
But it does n't make sense to save your own papers only in PDF because PDF is not really editable and does n't have the semantic information .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to save the source form or markup, use a language designed for it: LaTeX.
LaTeX lets you represent all the things you would want to represent in an academic paper, it's fairly readable, very widespread, and has tons of tools.
And LaTeX converts to both HTML and PDF.If you want to display on the web, use HTML.
It's meant for the web.
It's not a good representation for paged media.
If you must represent paged media, you need to use CSS or XSL, but you probably don't want to.If you want archival quality paged representations, PDF is the only game in town really.
HTML with CSS doesn't come close.
But it doesn't make sense to save your own papers only in PDF because PDF is not really editable and doesn't have the semantic information.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572285</id>
	<title>No CSS is crazy talk</title>
	<author>Rambo Tribble</author>
	<datestamp>1246639440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>HTML is about semantic content, not presentation. It is joined at the hip with CSS for presentation through the browser. Print is a form of presentation.</htmltext>
<tokenext>HTML is about semantic content , not presentation .
It is joined at the hip with CSS for presentation through the browser .
Print is a form of presentation .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HTML is about semantic content, not presentation.
It is joined at the hip with CSS for presentation through the browser.
Print is a form of presentation.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567959</id>
	<title>XSL:FO</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246552200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>There's a little-used standard that came out of the W3C along with XSLTs called XSL:FO.  You write your document in XSL:FO markup, and then one of any number of processors like <a href="http://www.renderx.com/tools/xep.html" title="renderx.com">XEP</a> [renderx.com] to convert it into PDF or what have you.</p><p><a href="http://www.w3schools.com/xslfo/default.asp" title="w3schools.com">http://www.w3schools.com/xslfo/default.asp</a> [w3schools.com]</p><p>One of the original purposes of it was so that you could use XSLTs to transform the same XML data into both XHTML or XSL:FO for publishing.  The standard never took off though.  XSL:FO just doesn't have enough options to be typographically interesting, compared to SVG.</p><p>Of course, the <i>right</i> answer is LaTeX, but you might want to give XSL:FO a try for familiarity's sake.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>There 's a little-used standard that came out of the W3C along with XSLTs called XSL : FO .
You write your document in XSL : FO markup , and then one of any number of processors like XEP [ renderx.com ] to convert it into PDF or what have you.http : //www.w3schools.com/xslfo/default.asp [ w3schools.com ] One of the original purposes of it was so that you could use XSLTs to transform the same XML data into both XHTML or XSL : FO for publishing .
The standard never took off though .
XSL : FO just does n't have enough options to be typographically interesting , compared to SVG.Of course , the right answer is LaTeX , but you might want to give XSL : FO a try for familiarity 's sake .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>There's a little-used standard that came out of the W3C along with XSLTs called XSL:FO.
You write your document in XSL:FO markup, and then one of any number of processors like XEP [renderx.com] to convert it into PDF or what have you.http://www.w3schools.com/xslfo/default.asp [w3schools.com]One of the original purposes of it was so that you could use XSLTs to transform the same XML data into both XHTML or XSL:FO for publishing.
The standard never took off though.
XSL:FO just doesn't have enough options to be typographically interesting, compared to SVG.Of course, the right answer is LaTeX, but you might want to give XSL:FO a try for familiarity's sake.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568871</id>
	<title>Re:texexplorer</title>
	<author>Yobgod Ababua</author>
	<datestamp>1246562940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>That example sounds like it could be well rendered using MathML... <a href="http://www.w3.org/Math/" title="w3.org">http://www.w3.org/Math/</a> [w3.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>That example sounds like it could be well rendered using MathML... http : //www.w3.org/Math/ [ w3.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That example sounds like it could be well rendered using MathML... http://www.w3.org/Math/ [w3.org]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567837</id>
	<title>Don't use HTML</title>
	<author>emandres</author>
	<datestamp>1246551180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>You wouldn't want to use HTML for something like this, especially with newer versions of HTML.  There has been a steady transition in HTML away from specification of the aesthetic appearance of a page.  For this reason tags like &lt;font&gt; and &lt;center&gt; are considered nonstandard anymore, mostly because CSS does a way better (and cleaner) job of it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You would n't want to use HTML for something like this , especially with newer versions of HTML .
There has been a steady transition in HTML away from specification of the aesthetic appearance of a page .
For this reason tags like and are considered nonstandard anymore , mostly because CSS does a way better ( and cleaner ) job of it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You wouldn't want to use HTML for something like this, especially with newer versions of HTML.
There has been a steady transition in HTML away from specification of the aesthetic appearance of a page.
For this reason tags like  and  are considered nonstandard anymore, mostly because CSS does a way better (and cleaner) job of it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568469</id>
	<title>ReST too</title>
	<author>greg1104</author>
	<datestamp>1246557600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Obviously the only sensible robust solutions to this problem are either LaTeX or Docbook.  The main problem with both of those is they're kind of painful to author.  What I've switched to for any quick documents I write is <a href="http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html" title="sourceforge.net">reST</a> [sourceforge.net].  It's easy to learn for quick documents, you can edit with just about anything (its rudimentary tables support is best handled with emacs), includes features like footnotes, and is easy to render into HTML and PDF.  After a few months of writing docs for some projects I work on in reST, I've found myself even writing all my random notes in that form, so that I can generated nicely printed versions of them at any time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Obviously the only sensible robust solutions to this problem are either LaTeX or Docbook .
The main problem with both of those is they 're kind of painful to author .
What I 've switched to for any quick documents I write is reST [ sourceforge.net ] .
It 's easy to learn for quick documents , you can edit with just about anything ( its rudimentary tables support is best handled with emacs ) , includes features like footnotes , and is easy to render into HTML and PDF .
After a few months of writing docs for some projects I work on in reST , I 've found myself even writing all my random notes in that form , so that I can generated nicely printed versions of them at any time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Obviously the only sensible robust solutions to this problem are either LaTeX or Docbook.
The main problem with both of those is they're kind of painful to author.
What I've switched to for any quick documents I write is reST [sourceforge.net].
It's easy to learn for quick documents, you can edit with just about anything (its rudimentary tables support is best handled with emacs), includes features like footnotes, and is easy to render into HTML and PDF.
After a few months of writing docs for some projects I work on in reST, I've found myself even writing all my random notes in that form, so that I can generated nicely printed versions of them at any time.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568431</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>AceofSpades19</author>
	<datestamp>1246557000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Rich Text Format is nothing like SGML. It has a completely different syntax and it behaves a lot differently.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Rich Text Format is nothing like SGML .
It has a completely different syntax and it behaves a lot differently .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Rich Text Format is nothing like SGML.
It has a completely different syntax and it behaves a lot differently.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569383</id>
	<title>That wouldn't be HTML</title>
	<author>Hai-Etlik</author>
	<datestamp>1246613880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>That's entirely counter to the philosophy of HTML.   It's meant to be independent of presentation so it can be presented in different ways.  There's good reason for CSS being separate and for this sort of thing being in there.

If you want a way to link to the point where a page break occurs in a particular print copy, I'd suggest adding <tt>a</tt> elements at the locations of the page breaks like this <tt>&lt;a id="page1"<nobr> <wbr></nobr>/&gt; </tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>That 's entirely counter to the philosophy of HTML .
It 's meant to be independent of presentation so it can be presented in different ways .
There 's good reason for CSS being separate and for this sort of thing being in there .
If you want a way to link to the point where a page break occurs in a particular print copy , I 'd suggest adding a elements at the locations of the page breaks like this / &gt;</tokentext>
<sentencetext>That's entirely counter to the philosophy of HTML.
It's meant to be independent of presentation so it can be presented in different ways.
There's good reason for CSS being separate and for this sort of thing being in there.
If you want a way to link to the point where a page break occurs in a particular print copy, I'd suggest adding a elements at the locations of the page breaks like this  /&gt; </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28574319</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>shininghappydude</author>
	<datestamp>1246652940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I completely concur about the SIL Gentium font for multilingual printing.  I've used it for years now for Russian-English documents.  It's only drawback is that it doesn't render nearly as nicely in browsers as it does on the printed page.  (My version of Gentium is old, so maybe something about the font has changed so it is no longer the case.)</htmltext>
<tokenext>I completely concur about the SIL Gentium font for multilingual printing .
I 've used it for years now for Russian-English documents .
It 's only drawback is that it does n't render nearly as nicely in browsers as it does on the printed page .
( My version of Gentium is old , so maybe something about the font has changed so it is no longer the case .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I completely concur about the SIL Gentium font for multilingual printing.
I've used it for years now for Russian-English documents.
It's only drawback is that it doesn't render nearly as nicely in browsers as it does on the printed page.
(My version of Gentium is old, so maybe something about the font has changed so it is no longer the case.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28578515</id>
	<title>This would be called the media rule</title>
	<author>Greg\_D</author>
	<datestamp>1246740360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Ala:<br><br>&lt;link href="http://www.michaeljacksonsmissingnose.com/screen.css" type="text/css" media="screen" title="screen stylesheet"&gt;<br>&lt;link href="http://www.michaeljacksonsmissingnose.com/print.css" type="text/css" media="print" title="print stylesheet"&gt;<br><br>Then in your print stylesheet, for print specific crap, you just do:<br><br>@media print {<br><br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; a {<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; text-decoration:none;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; color: black;<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; }<br><br>}<br><br>Or whatever it is you wanna do.  I mean, it's up to you as to how you want to define the size of your page, and they COULD add a feature to define the size of the page, but that's better handled in CSS than HTML.  The entire point of CSS is to change the way the document looks or is formatted without having to create a separate document for each way you want the document to be viewed.  Adding HTML tags is the exact WRONG way to go about this.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Ala : Then in your print stylesheet , for print specific crap , you just do : @ media print {         a {                 text-decoration : none ;                 color : black ;         } } Or whatever it is you wan na do .
I mean , it 's up to you as to how you want to define the size of your page , and they COULD add a feature to define the size of the page , but that 's better handled in CSS than HTML .
The entire point of CSS is to change the way the document looks or is formatted without having to create a separate document for each way you want the document to be viewed .
Adding HTML tags is the exact WRONG way to go about this .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Ala:Then in your print stylesheet, for print specific crap, you just do:@media print {
        a {
                text-decoration:none;
                color: black;
        }}Or whatever it is you wanna do.
I mean, it's up to you as to how you want to define the size of your page, and they COULD add a feature to define the size of the page, but that's better handled in CSS than HTML.
The entire point of CSS is to change the way the document looks or is formatted without having to create a separate document for each way you want the document to be viewed.
Adding HTML tags is the exact WRONG way to go about this.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571779</id>
	<title>CSS print media</title>
	<author>-Neko-</author>
	<datestamp>1246636560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>CSS3 does all you want: <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-page/" title="w3.org">http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-page/</a> [w3.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>CSS3 does all you want : http : //www.w3.org/TR/css3-page/ [ w3.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>CSS3 does all you want: http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-page/ [w3.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568497</id>
	<title>Hands down...</title>
	<author>juanergie</author>
	<datestamp>1246557960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>... you want \LaTeX</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>... you want \ LaTeX</tokentext>
<sentencetext>... you want \LaTeX</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28578093</id>
	<title>But will contiki web server run it.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246647300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Will xhtml run on the old commodore 64 web server running contiki <a href="http://www.c64web.com/" title="c64web.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.c64web.com/</a> [c64web.com] URL<br>I think contiki only does pure html ?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Will xhtml run on the old commodore 64 web server running contiki http : //www.c64web.com/ [ c64web.com ] URLI think contiki only does pure html ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Will xhtml run on the old commodore 64 web server running contiki http://www.c64web.com/ [c64web.com] URLI think contiki only does pure html ?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568419</id>
	<title>seriously?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246556880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why are obvious trolls being posted as if they were serious questions?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why are obvious trolls being posted as if they were serious questions ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why are obvious trolls being posted as if they were serious questions?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567705</id>
	<title>Why not use CSS?</title>
	<author>Homburg</author>
	<datestamp>1246549860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><em>Something that would make no use of CSS?</em></p><p>Given that <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/CSS2/page.html#page-box" title="w3.org">CSS does this already</a> [w3.org], what's the advantage of adding another way of doing it without CSS?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Something that would make no use of CSS ? Given that CSS does this already [ w3.org ] , what 's the advantage of adding another way of doing it without CSS ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Something that would make no use of CSS?Given that CSS does this already [w3.org], what's the advantage of adding another way of doing it without CSS?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567819</id>
	<title>You don't actually want HTML</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246551060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Seriously. It's pretty bad. You can, however, use Docbook (or your own schema or Docbook extended with your own stuff) and XSLT it into XTHML (or something entirely different) at the end.</p><p>Most likely you just want to use Latex though.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Seriously .
It 's pretty bad .
You can , however , use Docbook ( or your own schema or Docbook extended with your own stuff ) and XSLT it into XTHML ( or something entirely different ) at the end.Most likely you just want to use Latex though .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seriously.
It's pretty bad.
You can, however, use Docbook (or your own schema or Docbook extended with your own stuff) and XSLT it into XTHML (or something entirely different) at the end.Most likely you just want to use Latex though.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567787</id>
	<title>Not a bad idea but it points to a larger issue</title>
	<author>jeffgtr</author>
	<datestamp>1246550760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Actually this makes a great deal of sense to me. I'm not sure on this but I think HTML5 contains tags for many of the things needed. I don't think css is the answer though as it is for presentation only. HTML is for hierarchy and structure of information as is XML. The part that makes sense with this is that it would be standardized (if you can keep Microsoft out of it) and could easily be transitioned back and forth between the web, ebooks and whatever device came next.

PDF is widely used but truly it is a pain to convert into a structured document. Word is a nightmare with all of the jumbled up MS proprietary tags. I've yet to see an online editor that will clean up that mess with a simple copy and paste.

The real issue is standardization in the way we store textual information. It's a huge issue and frankly Microsoft needs to be called on the carpet for manipulating and at the very least getting in the way of standards. It's refusal to recognize standards has caused needless expense to anyone that publishes information on the web. Few people realize the damage MS has caused on the web. Everyone bitches and moans about their operating system but only those directly involved in creating content for the web seem to complain about IE and their corruption of a standardized open document format. The damage they have done in this arena will haunt us longer than windows will, in my humble but sincere opinion.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Actually this makes a great deal of sense to me .
I 'm not sure on this but I think HTML5 contains tags for many of the things needed .
I do n't think css is the answer though as it is for presentation only .
HTML is for hierarchy and structure of information as is XML .
The part that makes sense with this is that it would be standardized ( if you can keep Microsoft out of it ) and could easily be transitioned back and forth between the web , ebooks and whatever device came next .
PDF is widely used but truly it is a pain to convert into a structured document .
Word is a nightmare with all of the jumbled up MS proprietary tags .
I 've yet to see an online editor that will clean up that mess with a simple copy and paste .
The real issue is standardization in the way we store textual information .
It 's a huge issue and frankly Microsoft needs to be called on the carpet for manipulating and at the very least getting in the way of standards .
It 's refusal to recognize standards has caused needless expense to anyone that publishes information on the web .
Few people realize the damage MS has caused on the web .
Everyone bitches and moans about their operating system but only those directly involved in creating content for the web seem to complain about IE and their corruption of a standardized open document format .
The damage they have done in this arena will haunt us longer than windows will , in my humble but sincere opinion .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Actually this makes a great deal of sense to me.
I'm not sure on this but I think HTML5 contains tags for many of the things needed.
I don't think css is the answer though as it is for presentation only.
HTML is for hierarchy and structure of information as is XML.
The part that makes sense with this is that it would be standardized (if you can keep Microsoft out of it) and could easily be transitioned back and forth between the web, ebooks and whatever device came next.
PDF is widely used but truly it is a pain to convert into a structured document.
Word is a nightmare with all of the jumbled up MS proprietary tags.
I've yet to see an online editor that will clean up that mess with a simple copy and paste.
The real issue is standardization in the way we store textual information.
It's a huge issue and frankly Microsoft needs to be called on the carpet for manipulating and at the very least getting in the way of standards.
It's refusal to recognize standards has caused needless expense to anyone that publishes information on the web.
Few people realize the damage MS has caused on the web.
Everyone bitches and moans about their operating system but only those directly involved in creating content for the web seem to complain about IE and their corruption of a standardized open document format.
The damage they have done in this arena will haunt us longer than windows will, in my humble but sincere opinion.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568313</id>
	<title>Mod parent up</title>
	<author>bluej100</author>
	<datestamp>1246555380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>If you want to print HTML, Prince is the way to go. It even makes our end-user-generated TinyMCE documents look good.</htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want to print HTML , Prince is the way to go .
It even makes our end-user-generated TinyMCE documents look good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want to print HTML, Prince is the way to go.
It even makes our end-user-generated TinyMCE documents look good.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567763</id>
	<title>unnecessary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246550460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>the document size will increase.<br>normal text like ("this is my file and my image and my link and my e-mail")<br>will need more tag and element to let the browser speak with it.<br>e.g ("this is mymy file") and so on.</p><p>this is just an unnecessary waste for bandwidth and time<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:).</p><p>especially when there is an alternative solutions, e.g PDF, DOC, OpenOffice.</p><p>cheers</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>the document size will increase.normal text like ( " this is my file and my image and my link and my e-mail " ) will need more tag and element to let the browser speak with it.e.g ( " this is mymy file " ) and so on.this is just an unnecessary waste for bandwidth and time : ) .especially when there is an alternative solutions , e.g PDF , DOC , OpenOffice.cheers</tokentext>
<sentencetext>the document size will increase.normal text like ("this is my file and my image and my link and my e-mail")will need more tag and element to let the browser speak with it.e.g ("this is mymy file") and so on.this is just an unnecessary waste for bandwidth and time :).especially when there is an alternative solutions, e.g PDF, DOC, OpenOffice.cheers</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570245</id>
	<title>Re:texexplorer</title>
	<author>linuxtuba</author>
	<datestamp>1246625820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Already Exists</p><p>Tex the world <a href="http://thewe.net/tex/" title="thewe.net" rel="nofollow">http://thewe.net/tex/</a> [thewe.net]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Already ExistsTex the world http : //thewe.net/tex/ [ thewe.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Already ExistsTex the world http://thewe.net/tex/ [thewe.net]</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568189</id>
	<title>Re:In my day</title>
	<author>Barny</author>
	<datestamp>1246554240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Select everything you want on one page, wrap it in a table tag, set table to 100\% of screen height and leave a separate row at the bottom for page numbers (and a second for footnotes if there were any).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Select everything you want on one page , wrap it in a table tag , set table to 100 \ % of screen height and leave a separate row at the bottom for page numbers ( and a second for footnotes if there were any ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Select everything you want on one page, wrap it in a table tag, set table to 100\% of screen height and leave a separate row at the bottom for page numbers (and a second for footnotes if there were any).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569611</id>
	<title>Why force the page breaks?</title>
	<author>rew</author>
	<datestamp>1246616340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Why do you want to force the page breaks? It's stupid. HTML is intended to render correctly independent of the resolution, so independent of number-of-characters-that-fit-onto-a-page. Suppose someone gets your academic paper, but he is a bit blind. So he sets character size to 15pt, and prints it (for reading during a hypothetical train ride).</p><p>Someone else is concerned with the environment, has good eyes, and prints double sided with a 9 pt font.</p><p>Generating documents that handle this well, means you have to take care that you refer to "fig 3" and not to "the figure on page 2", things like that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Why do you want to force the page breaks ?
It 's stupid .
HTML is intended to render correctly independent of the resolution , so independent of number-of-characters-that-fit-onto-a-page .
Suppose someone gets your academic paper , but he is a bit blind .
So he sets character size to 15pt , and prints it ( for reading during a hypothetical train ride ) .Someone else is concerned with the environment , has good eyes , and prints double sided with a 9 pt font.Generating documents that handle this well , means you have to take care that you refer to " fig 3 " and not to " the figure on page 2 " , things like that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why do you want to force the page breaks?
It's stupid.
HTML is intended to render correctly independent of the resolution, so independent of number-of-characters-that-fit-onto-a-page.
Suppose someone gets your academic paper, but he is a bit blind.
So he sets character size to 15pt, and prints it (for reading during a hypothetical train ride).Someone else is concerned with the environment, has good eyes, and prints double sided with a 9 pt font.Generating documents that handle this well, means you have to take care that you refer to "fig 3" and not to "the figure on page 2", things like that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570131</id>
	<title>You are reinventing DocBook</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246624320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>You are trying to reinvent <a href="http://www.docbook.org/" title="docbook.org" rel="nofollow">docbook</a> [docbook.org].  Not only is everything you want done, it is implemented in several tools (<a href="http://www.xmlmind.com/xmleditor/" title="xmlmind.com" rel="nofollow">XMLMind</a> [xmlmind.com] and <a href="http://www.oxygenxml.com/docbook\_editor.html" title="oxygenxml.com" rel="nofollow">oXygen</a> [oxygenxml.com] are two I know of), has a standard method of converting it to any form you want (<a href="http://www.w3.org/Style/XSL/" title="w3.org" rel="nofollow">XSL, XSLT, XSL-FO</a> [w3.org]), and there are tools that are already written to take advantage of those standards (<a href="http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/" title="apache.org" rel="nofollow">Apache FOP</a> [apache.org] being a FLOSS one).  The latest version of DocBook uses XML namespaces, so you can mix in other markup languages as well; the canonical example is DocBook + MathML + SVG, which covers 99.9\% of the math/science based literature out there.  BTW, if you DO plan on going down this path, I suggest picking up a copy of <a href="http://oreilly.com/catalog/9780596527211/" title="oreilly.com" rel="nofollow">XSLT, 2nd edition</a> [oreilly.com] by Doug Tidwell.  The latest version of the DocBook book is supposed to be out in August; don't buy the version currently on sale, it is 10 years old, and does NOT cover the current version of DocBook.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You are trying to reinvent docbook [ docbook.org ] .
Not only is everything you want done , it is implemented in several tools ( XMLMind [ xmlmind.com ] and oXygen [ oxygenxml.com ] are two I know of ) , has a standard method of converting it to any form you want ( XSL , XSLT , XSL-FO [ w3.org ] ) , and there are tools that are already written to take advantage of those standards ( Apache FOP [ apache.org ] being a FLOSS one ) .
The latest version of DocBook uses XML namespaces , so you can mix in other markup languages as well ; the canonical example is DocBook + MathML + SVG , which covers 99.9 \ % of the math/science based literature out there .
BTW , if you DO plan on going down this path , I suggest picking up a copy of XSLT , 2nd edition [ oreilly.com ] by Doug Tidwell .
The latest version of the DocBook book is supposed to be out in August ; do n't buy the version currently on sale , it is 10 years old , and does NOT cover the current version of DocBook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You are trying to reinvent docbook [docbook.org].
Not only is everything you want done, it is implemented in several tools (XMLMind [xmlmind.com] and oXygen [oxygenxml.com] are two I know of), has a standard method of converting it to any form you want (XSL, XSLT, XSL-FO [w3.org]), and there are tools that are already written to take advantage of those standards (Apache FOP [apache.org] being a FLOSS one).
The latest version of DocBook uses XML namespaces, so you can mix in other markup languages as well; the canonical example is DocBook + MathML + SVG, which covers 99.9\% of the math/science based literature out there.
BTW, if you DO plan on going down this path, I suggest picking up a copy of XSLT, 2nd edition [oreilly.com] by Doug Tidwell.
The latest version of the DocBook book is supposed to be out in August; don't buy the version currently on sale, it is 10 years old, and does NOT cover the current version of DocBook.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567685</id>
	<title>Why not use CSS?</title>
	<author>mckinnsb</author>
	<datestamp>1246549620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I don't seem to understand why you couldn't simply change the properties of standard HTML tags to fit your needs with a simple CSS sheet. HTML, after all, was designed with the explicit purpose of representing a document. <br>
Otherwise, if you want special tags, use LaTEX.<br>
Otherwise, I'm sorry, its really a crazy idea.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I do n't seem to understand why you could n't simply change the properties of standard HTML tags to fit your needs with a simple CSS sheet .
HTML , after all , was designed with the explicit purpose of representing a document .
Otherwise , if you want special tags , use LaTEX .
Otherwise , I 'm sorry , its really a crazy idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I don't seem to understand why you couldn't simply change the properties of standard HTML tags to fit your needs with a simple CSS sheet.
HTML, after all, was designed with the explicit purpose of representing a document.
Otherwise, if you want special tags, use LaTEX.
Otherwise, I'm sorry, its really a crazy idea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568855</id>
	<title>Re:Have you looked at PrinceXML?</title>
	<author>Forget4it</author>
	<datestamp>1246562760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In PrinceXML using CSS you can't go in and out of italics on a the page running heading.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In PrinceXML using CSS you ca n't go in and out of italics on a the page running heading .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In PrinceXML using CSS you can't go in and out of italics on a the page running heading.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28577511</id>
	<title>XML?</title>
	<author>VirtualJWN</author>
	<datestamp>1246639860000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Isn't that what XML is for?  Document is the data.

I'm just saying....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't that what XML is for ?
Document is the data .
I 'm just saying... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't that what XML is for?
Document is the data.
I'm just saying....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569213</id>
	<title>Re:In my day</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246654380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well think about it... you don't really need foot-notes for most classwork, and if you do, you can put them all at the end of the document (before or after the bibliography).</p><p>The page numbers show up when you print the document with most web browsers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well think about it... you do n't really need foot-notes for most classwork , and if you do , you can put them all at the end of the document ( before or after the bibliography ) .The page numbers show up when you print the document with most web browsers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well think about it... you don't really need foot-notes for most classwork, and if you do, you can put them all at the end of the document (before or after the bibliography).The page numbers show up when you print the document with most web browsers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567951</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568233</id>
	<title>Learn the tools first, then worry about changing</title>
	<author>crmartin</author>
	<datestamp>1246554720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>See, as someone has already pointed out, there's at least one such tool that's in wide use already: TeX and LaTeX.  If you don't like that one, it turns out that HTML, with CSS and a little bit of Javascript, is perfectly capable of doing all the things you want, too.  You just have to learn how.  Have a look at Lie's <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Cascading-Style-Sheets-Designing-Web/dp/0321193121/ref=ntt\_at\_ep\_dpi\_1" title="amazon.com">Cascading Style Sheets: Designing for the Web</a> [amazon.com] (written and typeset in HTML/CSS) and at <a href="http://www.princexml.com/overview/" title="princexml.com">Prince XML</a> [princexml.com] for detailed examples.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>See , as someone has already pointed out , there 's at least one such tool that 's in wide use already : TeX and LaTeX .
If you do n't like that one , it turns out that HTML , with CSS and a little bit of Javascript , is perfectly capable of doing all the things you want , too .
You just have to learn how .
Have a look at Lie 's Cascading Style Sheets : Designing for the Web [ amazon.com ] ( written and typeset in HTML/CSS ) and at Prince XML [ princexml.com ] for detailed examples .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>See, as someone has already pointed out, there's at least one such tool that's in wide use already: TeX and LaTeX.
If you don't like that one, it turns out that HTML, with CSS and a little bit of Javascript, is perfectly capable of doing all the things you want, too.
You just have to learn how.
Have a look at Lie's Cascading Style Sheets: Designing for the Web [amazon.com] (written and typeset in HTML/CSS) and at Prince XML [princexml.com] for detailed examples.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568831</id>
	<title>A measured reply</title>
	<author>Yobgod Ababua</author>
	<datestamp>1246562280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>To echo some of what's already been said, if you really want a format that will look the same for all clients, HTML is not the answer. The problem is that HTML gives too much formatting control to the VIEWER, allowing one to change the font size, change the screen (or paper!) size (think everyone prints on A4, or on US Letter? Think again!!), or even the entire font. If you really want your report to look the same, export to PDF or use a real typesetting language.</p><p>That said, if you really want to use HTML, look more closely at the "orphan control" CSS options. Used properly on your p or div elements, they can help ensure that your paragraphs or sections line up nicely on separate pages, no matter what sizes those pages end up being, or what font they end up being rendered in. If what you really want is to keep your writing from becoming visually fragmented, this may very well do the trick for you.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>To echo some of what 's already been said , if you really want a format that will look the same for all clients , HTML is not the answer .
The problem is that HTML gives too much formatting control to the VIEWER , allowing one to change the font size , change the screen ( or paper !
) size ( think everyone prints on A4 , or on US Letter ?
Think again ! !
) , or even the entire font .
If you really want your report to look the same , export to PDF or use a real typesetting language.That said , if you really want to use HTML , look more closely at the " orphan control " CSS options .
Used properly on your p or div elements , they can help ensure that your paragraphs or sections line up nicely on separate pages , no matter what sizes those pages end up being , or what font they end up being rendered in .
If what you really want is to keep your writing from becoming visually fragmented , this may very well do the trick for you .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>To echo some of what's already been said, if you really want a format that will look the same for all clients, HTML is not the answer.
The problem is that HTML gives too much formatting control to the VIEWER, allowing one to change the font size, change the screen (or paper!
) size (think everyone prints on A4, or on US Letter?
Think again!!
), or even the entire font.
If you really want your report to look the same, export to PDF or use a real typesetting language.That said, if you really want to use HTML, look more closely at the "orphan control" CSS options.
Used properly on your p or div elements, they can help ensure that your paragraphs or sections line up nicely on separate pages, no matter what sizes those pages end up being, or what font they end up being rendered in.
If what you really want is to keep your writing from becoming visually fragmented, this may very well do the trick for you.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623</id>
	<title>LaTeX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246549200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext>You seem to be talking about LaTex. It already exists. Don't reinvent it.</htmltext>
<tokenext>You seem to be talking about LaTex .
It already exists .
Do n't reinvent it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You seem to be talking about LaTex.
It already exists.
Don't reinvent it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568845</id>
	<title>I am curious to know...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246562520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Why the OP specified not using CSS and then suggested an HTML element that looks almost exactly like CSS?<br> <br>
CSS has a method of creating pages, for printing and more.  It's no more difficult to learn than HTML is.  You could use XML, create all the custom tags you want, and use XSL (oh look stylesheets again) to style the XML however you want.<br> <br>
HTML5 is coming out in the near or distant future, if you have suggestions for tags and functions, you might want to try to get involved with the W3.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Why the OP specified not using CSS and then suggested an HTML element that looks almost exactly like CSS ?
CSS has a method of creating pages , for printing and more .
It 's no more difficult to learn than HTML is .
You could use XML , create all the custom tags you want , and use XSL ( oh look stylesheets again ) to style the XML however you want .
HTML5 is coming out in the near or distant future , if you have suggestions for tags and functions , you might want to try to get involved with the W3 .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Why the OP specified not using CSS and then suggested an HTML element that looks almost exactly like CSS?
CSS has a method of creating pages, for printing and more.
It's no more difficult to learn than HTML is.
You could use XML, create all the custom tags you want, and use XSL (oh look stylesheets again) to style the XML however you want.
HTML5 is coming out in the near or distant future, if you have suggestions for tags and functions, you might want to try to get involved with the W3.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567923</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246551960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LaTex is <em>a</em> solution for certain (usually niche) purposes, but has its drawbacks, like everything else. The problem is that we are a dealing with an online world, where things are published in several different formats, online and offline. LaTex doesn't translate easily or cleanly into HTML, or vice-versa. And good luck getting people outside of math and science academia to use LaTex.</p><p>This is a real problem, and shouldn't simply be brushed aside with "use this" comments. There currently is no workable format, no Lingua Franca for multipurpose documents. A solution should at least be attempted to make the web, word processing, page layout and typography interoperable.</p><p>Don't get me wrong, I actually like LaTex, but it's an exercise in frustration trying to integrate it with the rest of the world.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LaTex is a solution for certain ( usually niche ) purposes , but has its drawbacks , like everything else .
The problem is that we are a dealing with an online world , where things are published in several different formats , online and offline .
LaTex does n't translate easily or cleanly into HTML , or vice-versa .
And good luck getting people outside of math and science academia to use LaTex.This is a real problem , and should n't simply be brushed aside with " use this " comments .
There currently is no workable format , no Lingua Franca for multipurpose documents .
A solution should at least be attempted to make the web , word processing , page layout and typography interoperable.Do n't get me wrong , I actually like LaTex , but it 's an exercise in frustration trying to integrate it with the rest of the world .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LaTex is a solution for certain (usually niche) purposes, but has its drawbacks, like everything else.
The problem is that we are a dealing with an online world, where things are published in several different formats, online and offline.
LaTex doesn't translate easily or cleanly into HTML, or vice-versa.
And good luck getting people outside of math and science academia to use LaTex.This is a real problem, and shouldn't simply be brushed aside with "use this" comments.
There currently is no workable format, no Lingua Franca for multipurpose documents.
A solution should at least be attempted to make the web, word processing, page layout and typography interoperable.Don't get me wrong, I actually like LaTex, but it's an exercise in frustration trying to integrate it with the rest of the world.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570351</id>
	<title>Right tool for the right job, dammit</title>
	<author>SuiteSisterMary</author>
	<datestamp>1246627140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>On a very practical note, you'd literally be laughed out of any print shop where you showed up with your earnest little smile and a USB key with an HTML file, and an expectation of getting an accurate print-out.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>On a very practical note , you 'd literally be laughed out of any print shop where you showed up with your earnest little smile and a USB key with an HTML file , and an expectation of getting an accurate print-out .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>On a very practical note, you'd literally be laughed out of any print shop where you showed up with your earnest little smile and a USB key with an HTML file, and an expectation of getting an accurate print-out.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568345</id>
	<title>Learn the truth about Slashdot.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246555800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Behold <a href="http://anti-slash.org/" title="anti-slash.org" rel="nofollow">Anti-Slash</a> [anti-slash.org], the jihad HQ for the holy war against the Slashdot hive-mind.  See our extensive documented failures of Slashdot, and make today the last day of being a robot.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Behold Anti-Slash [ anti-slash.org ] , the jihad HQ for the holy war against the Slashdot hive-mind .
See our extensive documented failures of Slashdot , and make today the last day of being a robot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Behold Anti-Slash [anti-slash.org], the jihad HQ for the holy war against the Slashdot hive-mind.
See our extensive documented failures of Slashdot, and make today the last day of being a robot.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567759</id>
	<title>hey, why don't we...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246550460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>create yet another little-used and poorly supported document format...</htmltext>
<tokenext>create yet another little-used and poorly supported document format.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>create yet another little-used and poorly supported document format...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569899</id>
	<title>Re:XSL:FO</title>
	<author>styrotech</author>
	<datestamp>1246620420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>You write your document in XSL:FO markup, and then one of any number of processors like XEP to convert it into PDF or what have you.</p></div></blockquote><p>Ouch<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>Hand writing XSL:FO is extremely painful - very fiddly and the embedded layout/styling gets tedious quickly. It's kinda like writing a very very long webpage using HTML 3.2 with all the nasty old embedded presentation tags (but worse).</p><blockquote><div><p>One of the original purposes of it was so that you could use XSLTs to transform the same XML data into both XHTML or XSL:FO for publishing.</p></div></blockquote><p>I have a feeling that is a bit backwards. The original standard was XSL and it was going to include everything related to transforms and publishing, but it got too large and complex so they split it into XSLT for the transforms and XSL:FO for the page description language. Much better that way, as XSLT has wider uses than publishing.</p><p>I think XSL:FO was always intended to be generated via XSLT rather than hand written, and I don't think that has changed at all. That way if you only need to a styling change, rather than making a zillion edits throughout the document you change the transform. It is analogous to how CSS make styling changes much easier with HTML.</p><p>Personally I'd rather use some other semantic format (eg Docbook, DITA etc) that can be transformed into XSL:FO via XSLT when required (eg on the way to PDF generation). That way you already get some handy XSLT starting points to work with. Making the occasional small tweak to XSLT isn't too bad, but writing a large complex set of transforms from scratch isn't something I'd want to do<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You write your document in XSL : FO markup , and then one of any number of processors like XEP to convert it into PDF or what have you.Ouch : ) Hand writing XSL : FO is extremely painful - very fiddly and the embedded layout/styling gets tedious quickly .
It 's kinda like writing a very very long webpage using HTML 3.2 with all the nasty old embedded presentation tags ( but worse ) .One of the original purposes of it was so that you could use XSLTs to transform the same XML data into both XHTML or XSL : FO for publishing.I have a feeling that is a bit backwards .
The original standard was XSL and it was going to include everything related to transforms and publishing , but it got too large and complex so they split it into XSLT for the transforms and XSL : FO for the page description language .
Much better that way , as XSLT has wider uses than publishing.I think XSL : FO was always intended to be generated via XSLT rather than hand written , and I do n't think that has changed at all .
That way if you only need to a styling change , rather than making a zillion edits throughout the document you change the transform .
It is analogous to how CSS make styling changes much easier with HTML.Personally I 'd rather use some other semantic format ( eg Docbook , DITA etc ) that can be transformed into XSL : FO via XSLT when required ( eg on the way to PDF generation ) .
That way you already get some handy XSLT starting points to work with .
Making the occasional small tweak to XSLT is n't too bad , but writing a large complex set of transforms from scratch is n't something I 'd want to do : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You write your document in XSL:FO markup, and then one of any number of processors like XEP to convert it into PDF or what have you.Ouch :)Hand writing XSL:FO is extremely painful - very fiddly and the embedded layout/styling gets tedious quickly.
It's kinda like writing a very very long webpage using HTML 3.2 with all the nasty old embedded presentation tags (but worse).One of the original purposes of it was so that you could use XSLTs to transform the same XML data into both XHTML or XSL:FO for publishing.I have a feeling that is a bit backwards.
The original standard was XSL and it was going to include everything related to transforms and publishing, but it got too large and complex so they split it into XSLT for the transforms and XSL:FO for the page description language.
Much better that way, as XSLT has wider uses than publishing.I think XSL:FO was always intended to be generated via XSLT rather than hand written, and I don't think that has changed at all.
That way if you only need to a styling change, rather than making a zillion edits throughout the document you change the transform.
It is analogous to how CSS make styling changes much easier with HTML.Personally I'd rather use some other semantic format (eg Docbook, DITA etc) that can be transformed into XSL:FO via XSLT when required (eg on the way to PDF generation).
That way you already get some handy XSLT starting points to work with.
Making the occasional small tweak to XSLT isn't too bad, but writing a large complex set of transforms from scratch isn't something I'd want to do :)
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567959</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570631</id>
	<title>Re:Wrong, in many ways</title>
	<author>drinkypoo</author>
	<datestamp>1246629360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What I found most confusing about the question was the reference to paging as relates to bibliographic references. This is a strange question for two reasons:<br>1) Bibliographic references are typically treated as endnotes; i.e. the references appear throughout the text (or at least chapter) and follow the text in question.<br>2) Footnotes and endnotes are both creations which existed because hypertext did not. We still use symbol reference hyperlinks next to relevant text in hypertext because that is the commonly accepted scheme of writing certain types of document. In a hypertext document, however, the notes can simply jump to the footnote or endnote, and the user can click the 'back' button to get back to where they were (if you haven't totally broken the page metaphor with some sort of unnecessary dynamic content...)<br>It seems to me that as you say they want a documentation markup language which can be exported to HTML, or that they want PDF.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What I found most confusing about the question was the reference to paging as relates to bibliographic references .
This is a strange question for two reasons : 1 ) Bibliographic references are typically treated as endnotes ; i.e .
the references appear throughout the text ( or at least chapter ) and follow the text in question.2 ) Footnotes and endnotes are both creations which existed because hypertext did not .
We still use symbol reference hyperlinks next to relevant text in hypertext because that is the commonly accepted scheme of writing certain types of document .
In a hypertext document , however , the notes can simply jump to the footnote or endnote , and the user can click the 'back ' button to get back to where they were ( if you have n't totally broken the page metaphor with some sort of unnecessary dynamic content... ) It seems to me that as you say they want a documentation markup language which can be exported to HTML , or that they want PDF .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What I found most confusing about the question was the reference to paging as relates to bibliographic references.
This is a strange question for two reasons:1) Bibliographic references are typically treated as endnotes; i.e.
the references appear throughout the text (or at least chapter) and follow the text in question.2) Footnotes and endnotes are both creations which existed because hypertext did not.
We still use symbol reference hyperlinks next to relevant text in hypertext because that is the commonly accepted scheme of writing certain types of document.
In a hypertext document, however, the notes can simply jump to the footnote or endnote, and the user can click the 'back' button to get back to where they were (if you haven't totally broken the page metaphor with some sort of unnecessary dynamic content...)It seems to me that as you say they want a documentation markup language which can be exported to HTML, or that they want PDF.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567721</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568159</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>plasticsquirrel</author>
	<datestamp>1246553940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Use LaTex.  Except for the often limited fonts, it is vastly superior to an word processor, because a word processor is not the write tool to create real documents.  We have know that for many years.  That is why people bought pagemaker.  And I think the lack of fonts forces people to create compelling content.  LaTex is free, there are many good books,and if you do have a hankering to code, you can always play with Tex.</p></div><p>LaTeX has limited fonts, but if you use <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XeTeX" title="wikipedia.org">XeTeX</a> [wikipedia.org] (which uses LaTeX), you can not only use all the LaTeX stuff, but also any TrueType or OpenType font, and native unicode support as well. This is a godsend for typesetting anything that includes words or characters not in English, or just for people who are picky about typography. My personal favorite font is the open source <a href="http://scripts.sil.org/gentium" title="sil.org">SIL Gentium</a> [sil.org] family, which is not only much more beautiful and readable than Times, but contains a fuller character set that makes it compatible with many more languages. Once you start writing documents with XeTeX and nicer fonts, you see how lacking word processors are for good typography and well-structured documents, and how self-limiting the concept is.<br> <br>For newcomers to LaTeX and XeTeX, including packages and specifying options can be a bit time-consuming when you just want to get started with a basic A4-sized document. Here is the basic XeTeX file template I use for simple stuff. I'm picky about margins, line spacing, fonts, etc. so you know that it's a safe place to start out.
<br>-</p><p><div class="quote"><p>\documentclass[11pt]{article}<br> <br>

\%\%<br>
\% XeTeX packages<br>
\%\%<br>
\usepackage{fontspec}<br>
\usepackage{xunicode}<br>
\usepackage{xltxtra}<br> <br>

\%\%<br>
\% Formatting packages<br>
\%\%<br>
\usepackage{setspace}<br>
\usepackage[vcentering,dvips]{geometry}<br>
\usepackage{fancyhdr}<br> <br>

\geometry{papersize={8.5in,11in},total={6.5in,8.8in}}<br> <br>

\pdfpagewidth 8.5in<br>
\pdfpageheight 11in<br> <br>

\% 10pt font: 1.15<br>
\% 11pt font: 1.1<br>
\setstretch{1.1}<br> <br>

\setmainfont[Mapping=tex-text]{Gentium Basic}<br> <br>

\begin{document}<br> <br>Some text...<br> <br>\end{document}</p></div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Use LaTex .
Except for the often limited fonts , it is vastly superior to an word processor , because a word processor is not the write tool to create real documents .
We have know that for many years .
That is why people bought pagemaker .
And I think the lack of fonts forces people to create compelling content .
LaTex is free , there are many good books,and if you do have a hankering to code , you can always play with Tex.LaTeX has limited fonts , but if you use XeTeX [ wikipedia.org ] ( which uses LaTeX ) , you can not only use all the LaTeX stuff , but also any TrueType or OpenType font , and native unicode support as well .
This is a godsend for typesetting anything that includes words or characters not in English , or just for people who are picky about typography .
My personal favorite font is the open source SIL Gentium [ sil.org ] family , which is not only much more beautiful and readable than Times , but contains a fuller character set that makes it compatible with many more languages .
Once you start writing documents with XeTeX and nicer fonts , you see how lacking word processors are for good typography and well-structured documents , and how self-limiting the concept is .
For newcomers to LaTeX and XeTeX , including packages and specifying options can be a bit time-consuming when you just want to get started with a basic A4-sized document .
Here is the basic XeTeX file template I use for simple stuff .
I 'm picky about margins , line spacing , fonts , etc .
so you know that it 's a safe place to start out .
- \ documentclass [ 11pt ] { article } \ % \ % \ % XeTeX packages \ % \ % \ usepackage { fontspec } \ usepackage { xunicode } \ usepackage { xltxtra } \ % \ % \ % Formatting packages \ % \ % \ usepackage { setspace } \ usepackage [ vcentering,dvips ] { geometry } \ usepackage { fancyhdr } \ geometry { papersize = { 8.5in,11in } ,total = { 6.5in,8.8in } } \ pdfpagewidth 8.5in \ pdfpageheight 11in \ % 10pt font : 1.15 \ % 11pt font : 1.1 \ setstretch { 1.1 } \ setmainfont [ Mapping = tex-text ] { Gentium Basic } \ begin { document } Some text... \ end { document }</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use LaTex.
Except for the often limited fonts, it is vastly superior to an word processor, because a word processor is not the write tool to create real documents.
We have know that for many years.
That is why people bought pagemaker.
And I think the lack of fonts forces people to create compelling content.
LaTex is free, there are many good books,and if you do have a hankering to code, you can always play with Tex.LaTeX has limited fonts, but if you use XeTeX [wikipedia.org] (which uses LaTeX), you can not only use all the LaTeX stuff, but also any TrueType or OpenType font, and native unicode support as well.
This is a godsend for typesetting anything that includes words or characters not in English, or just for people who are picky about typography.
My personal favorite font is the open source SIL Gentium [sil.org] family, which is not only much more beautiful and readable than Times, but contains a fuller character set that makes it compatible with many more languages.
Once you start writing documents with XeTeX and nicer fonts, you see how lacking word processors are for good typography and well-structured documents, and how self-limiting the concept is.
For newcomers to LaTeX and XeTeX, including packages and specifying options can be a bit time-consuming when you just want to get started with a basic A4-sized document.
Here is the basic XeTeX file template I use for simple stuff.
I'm picky about margins, line spacing, fonts, etc.
so you know that it's a safe place to start out.
-\documentclass[11pt]{article} 

\%\%
\% XeTeX packages
\%\%
\usepackage{fontspec}
\usepackage{xunicode}
\usepackage{xltxtra} 

\%\%
\% Formatting packages
\%\%
\usepackage{setspace}
\usepackage[vcentering,dvips]{geometry}
\usepackage{fancyhdr} 

\geometry{papersize={8.5in,11in},total={6.5in,8.8in}} 

\pdfpagewidth 8.5in
\pdfpageheight 11in 

\% 10pt font: 1.15
\% 11pt font: 1.1
\setstretch{1.1} 

\setmainfont[Mapping=tex-text]{Gentium Basic} 

\begin{document} Some text... \end{document}
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572729</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>dskoll</author>
	<datestamp>1246642320000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p> <i>LaTex doesn't translate easily or cleanly into HTML</i>
</p><p>Actually, Tex4ht does a superb job of translating LaTeX into readable HTML.  We use it internally to produce HTML versions of our product manuals.  (We ship both PDF and HTML.)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LaTex does n't translate easily or cleanly into HTML Actually , Tex4ht does a superb job of translating LaTeX into readable HTML .
We use it internally to produce HTML versions of our product manuals .
( We ship both PDF and HTML .
)</tokentext>
<sentencetext> LaTex doesn't translate easily or cleanly into HTML
Actually, Tex4ht does a superb job of translating LaTeX into readable HTML.
We use it internally to produce HTML versions of our product manuals.
(We ship both PDF and HTML.
)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567771</id>
	<title>Nope</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246550580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HTML describes a document. "Document" used to imply printed pages, but it doesn't anymore. HTML doesn't have anything to represent the notion of a page because documents don't have pages.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HTML describes a document .
" Document " used to imply printed pages , but it does n't anymore .
HTML does n't have anything to represent the notion of a page because documents do n't have pages .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HTML describes a document.
"Document" used to imply printed pages, but it doesn't anymore.
HTML doesn't have anything to represent the notion of a page because documents don't have pages.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569455</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>TheRaven64</author>
	<datestamp>1246614900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> LaTex doesn't translate easily or cleanly into HTML, or vice-versa</p></div><p>LaTeX converts very well to [X]HTML using <a href="http://www.cse.ohio-state.edu/~gurari/TeX4ht/" title="ohio-state.edu">tex4ht</a> [ohio-state.edu].  I know one person who has written his entire web site in LaTeX and compiled it with tex4ht.  Lots of people use it for online copies of papers and they look good.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>LaTex does n't translate easily or cleanly into HTML , or vice-versaLaTeX converts very well to [ X ] HTML using tex4ht [ ohio-state.edu ] .
I know one person who has written his entire web site in LaTeX and compiled it with tex4ht .
Lots of people use it for online copies of papers and they look good .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> LaTex doesn't translate easily or cleanly into HTML, or vice-versaLaTeX converts very well to [X]HTML using tex4ht [ohio-state.edu].
I know one person who has written his entire web site in LaTeX and compiled it with tex4ht.
Lots of people use it for online copies of papers and they look good.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572663</id>
	<title>Re:You're on the right track, for the wrong reason</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246642020000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>&gt; The ability to hard code page numbers into an HTML document isn't [useful]</p><p>BS. As always, a slashdotter recommends changing the way the world works to fit the available tools, instead of wondering how the tools could be fixed to suit the world, like the original poster.</p><p>Getting an HTML rendering engine to yield a page number, given an arbitrary reference inside a document is a SMOP. And waaaaay easier than convincing every author in the world to "number documents by section, and you can make the numbering fine-grained enough for bibliographic references".</p><p>By the way, I agree with others, LaTeX is some really wonderful technology.  '80's technology.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>&gt; The ability to hard code page numbers into an HTML document is n't [ useful ] BS .
As always , a slashdotter recommends changing the way the world works to fit the available tools , instead of wondering how the tools could be fixed to suit the world , like the original poster.Getting an HTML rendering engine to yield a page number , given an arbitrary reference inside a document is a SMOP .
And waaaaay easier than convincing every author in the world to " number documents by section , and you can make the numbering fine-grained enough for bibliographic references " .By the way , I agree with others , LaTeX is some really wonderful technology .
'80 's technology .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>&gt; The ability to hard code page numbers into an HTML document isn't [useful]BS.
As always, a slashdotter recommends changing the way the world works to fit the available tools, instead of wondering how the tools could be fixed to suit the world, like the original poster.Getting an HTML rendering engine to yield a page number, given an arbitrary reference inside a document is a SMOP.
And waaaaay easier than convincing every author in the world to "number documents by section, and you can make the numbering fine-grained enough for bibliographic references".By the way, I agree with others, LaTeX is some really wonderful technology.
'80's technology.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568073</id>
	<title>Docbook, definitely</title>
	<author>ishmalius</author>
	<datestamp>1246553160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>It has exactly what you need,  an html-like format, but tagged by meaning, not presentation.  The project has tools to convert it to printable formats.</p><p>The spec:  <a href="http://www.docbook.org/" title="docbook.org">http://www.docbook.org/</a> [docbook.org]</p><p>The tools: <a href="http://docbook.sourceforge.net/" title="sourceforge.net">http://docbook.sourceforge.net/</a> [sourceforge.net]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>It has exactly what you need , an html-like format , but tagged by meaning , not presentation .
The project has tools to convert it to printable formats.The spec : http : //www.docbook.org/ [ docbook.org ] The tools : http : //docbook.sourceforge.net/ [ sourceforge.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>It has exactly what you need,  an html-like format, but tagged by meaning, not presentation.
The project has tools to convert it to printable formats.The spec:  http://www.docbook.org/ [docbook.org]The tools: http://docbook.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569577</id>
	<title>Pages = anchors</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246616040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HTML doesn't work well with pages, rather instead use generous anchors with a consistent naming scheme.  For example, using headers to separate sections, you could label the anchors by section, subsection, paragraph numbers.<br>
&nbsp; <br>But as others have said, use LaTeX and/or Lyx.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HTML does n't work well with pages , rather instead use generous anchors with a consistent naming scheme .
For example , using headers to separate sections , you could label the anchors by section , subsection , paragraph numbers .
  But as others have said , use LaTeX and/or Lyx .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HTML doesn't work well with pages, rather instead use generous anchors with a consistent naming scheme.
For example, using headers to separate sections, you could label the anchors by section, subsection, paragraph numbers.
  But as others have said, use LaTeX and/or Lyx.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568087</id>
	<title>Use DITA</title>
	<author>wooden pickle</author>
	<datestamp>1246553220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Someone mentioned XML/XSL/FO. Don't try to write your content in XSL-FO. You'll hate every minute of it.</p><p>I'd look in to using DITA (Darwin Information Typing Architecture). It's a set of canned XML structures, plus a specification for how to process and customize those structures. It includes tags for stuff like footnotes...I bet it covers a lot of your use cases. There are some good intros to how these XML structures work here: <a href="http://dita.xml.org/book/dita-wiki-knowledgebase" title="xml.org" rel="nofollow">http://dita.xml.org/book/dita-wiki-knowledgebase</a> [xml.org]</p><p>As DITA is XML, you can convert it to HTML and whatever else you feel like, pretty easily. There's an open-source implementation of the DITA spec called the DITA Open Toolkit (http://sourceforge.net/projects/dita-ot/). The DITA Open Toolkit includes stylesheets/scripts to publish HTML and PDF, among other things. PDFs are published via XSL-FO. Just like HTML needs a web browser to render something useful, XSL-FO requires a FO processor to create a PDF. So, in the end you write DITA, XSLT and other scripts transform that DITA to XSL-FO, the a FO processor consumes the XSL-FO and spits out a PDF. The DITA Open Toolkit comes with an open-source FO processor (Apache FOP). FOP doesn't fulfill everyone's needs, but it might work very well for you.</p><p>Unfortunately, working with the Open Toolkit and customizing its output can be a bit unwieldy. <a href="http://groups.yahoo.com/search?query=dita+users" title="yahoo.com" rel="nofollow">http://groups.yahoo.com/search?query=dita+users</a> [yahoo.com] is a pretty good place to look for help.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Someone mentioned XML/XSL/FO .
Do n't try to write your content in XSL-FO .
You 'll hate every minute of it.I 'd look in to using DITA ( Darwin Information Typing Architecture ) .
It 's a set of canned XML structures , plus a specification for how to process and customize those structures .
It includes tags for stuff like footnotes...I bet it covers a lot of your use cases .
There are some good intros to how these XML structures work here : http : //dita.xml.org/book/dita-wiki-knowledgebase [ xml.org ] As DITA is XML , you can convert it to HTML and whatever else you feel like , pretty easily .
There 's an open-source implementation of the DITA spec called the DITA Open Toolkit ( http : //sourceforge.net/projects/dita-ot/ ) .
The DITA Open Toolkit includes stylesheets/scripts to publish HTML and PDF , among other things .
PDFs are published via XSL-FO .
Just like HTML needs a web browser to render something useful , XSL-FO requires a FO processor to create a PDF .
So , in the end you write DITA , XSLT and other scripts transform that DITA to XSL-FO , the a FO processor consumes the XSL-FO and spits out a PDF .
The DITA Open Toolkit comes with an open-source FO processor ( Apache FOP ) .
FOP does n't fulfill everyone 's needs , but it might work very well for you.Unfortunately , working with the Open Toolkit and customizing its output can be a bit unwieldy .
http : //groups.yahoo.com/search ? query = dita + users [ yahoo.com ] is a pretty good place to look for help .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Someone mentioned XML/XSL/FO.
Don't try to write your content in XSL-FO.
You'll hate every minute of it.I'd look in to using DITA (Darwin Information Typing Architecture).
It's a set of canned XML structures, plus a specification for how to process and customize those structures.
It includes tags for stuff like footnotes...I bet it covers a lot of your use cases.
There are some good intros to how these XML structures work here: http://dita.xml.org/book/dita-wiki-knowledgebase [xml.org]As DITA is XML, you can convert it to HTML and whatever else you feel like, pretty easily.
There's an open-source implementation of the DITA spec called the DITA Open Toolkit (http://sourceforge.net/projects/dita-ot/).
The DITA Open Toolkit includes stylesheets/scripts to publish HTML and PDF, among other things.
PDFs are published via XSL-FO.
Just like HTML needs a web browser to render something useful, XSL-FO requires a FO processor to create a PDF.
So, in the end you write DITA, XSLT and other scripts transform that DITA to XSL-FO, the a FO processor consumes the XSL-FO and spits out a PDF.
The DITA Open Toolkit comes with an open-source FO processor (Apache FOP).
FOP doesn't fulfill everyone's needs, but it might work very well for you.Unfortunately, working with the Open Toolkit and customizing its output can be a bit unwieldy.
http://groups.yahoo.com/search?query=dita+users [yahoo.com] is a pretty good place to look for help.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570041</id>
	<title>Re:texexplorer</title>
	<author>goose-incarnated</author>
	<datestamp>1246622940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p> <tt>
Still, to address the question of the submitter, it would be nice to have something like

&lt;latex&gt;
$\int\_0^1 \frac{\sqrt{\sin(x)}}{1+x^2} \; dx$.
&lt;/latex&gt;

It would not have to be the full latex stack but the ability to place mini latex pages into
HTML documents. Its a pity techexplorer technology seems have disappeared. If IBM would
opensource it, it could become an add-on for firefox.
</tt></p> </div><p>Why does it need to be an add-on for firefox? That could more easily be rendered as
inline low-res images by the server, so currently it can be done.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Still , to address the question of the submitter , it would be nice to have something like $ \ int \ _0 ^ 1 \ frac { \ sqrt { \ sin ( x ) } } { 1 + x ^ 2 } \ ; dx $ .
It would not have to be the full latex stack but the ability to place mini latex pages into HTML documents .
Its a pity techexplorer technology seems have disappeared .
If IBM would opensource it , it could become an add-on for firefox .
Why does it need to be an add-on for firefox ?
That could more easily be rendered as inline low-res images by the server , so currently it can be done .</tokentext>
<sentencetext> 
Still, to address the question of the submitter, it would be nice to have something like


$\int\_0^1 \frac{\sqrt{\sin(x)}}{1+x^2} \; dx$.
It would not have to be the full latex stack but the ability to place mini latex pages into
HTML documents.
Its a pity techexplorer technology seems have disappeared.
If IBM would
opensource it, it could become an add-on for firefox.
Why does it need to be an add-on for firefox?
That could more easily be rendered as
inline low-res images by the server, so currently it can be done.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28592461</id>
	<title>QUality PDF output from HTML</title>
	<author>rolandw</author>
	<datestamp>1246878540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We searched for ages for a tool to produce high quality print output from HTML for exactly the same reasons before stumbling on Prince (http://www.princexml.com) and haven't regretted adopting it. We use it from wiki pages, for technical and sales documents, for theses. It is CSS3 aware but the underlieing documents still work in most browsers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We searched for ages for a tool to produce high quality print output from HTML for exactly the same reasons before stumbling on Prince ( http : //www.princexml.com ) and have n't regretted adopting it .
We use it from wiki pages , for technical and sales documents , for theses .
It is CSS3 aware but the underlieing documents still work in most browsers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We searched for ages for a tool to produce high quality print output from HTML for exactly the same reasons before stumbling on Prince (http://www.princexml.com) and haven't regretted adopting it.
We use it from wiki pages, for technical and sales documents, for theses.
It is CSS3 aware but the underlieing documents still work in most browsers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569655</id>
	<title>Consider using reStructued text</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246616940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can write your document in plain text then transform it into HTML or PDF etc using docutils.</p><p>http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/quickstart.html</p><p>The entire Python documentation is written in it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can write your document in plain text then transform it into HTML or PDF etc using docutils.http : //docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/quickstart.htmlThe entire Python documentation is written in it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can write your document in plain text then transform it into HTML or PDF etc using docutils.http://docutils.sourceforge.net/docs/user/rst/quickstart.htmlThe entire Python documentation is written in it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28592971</id>
	<title>Use paragraph numbers</title>
	<author>aminorex</author>
	<datestamp>1246885560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Apply grey superscript paragraph numbers, and use those to refer to the text, instead of page numbers.  This resolves the problem of varying output devices which is the absolute show-stopper for incorporating pagination into html.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Apply grey superscript paragraph numbers , and use those to refer to the text , instead of page numbers .
This resolves the problem of varying output devices which is the absolute show-stopper for incorporating pagination into html .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Apply grey superscript paragraph numbers, and use those to refer to the text, instead of page numbers.
This resolves the problem of varying output devices which is the absolute show-stopper for incorporating pagination into html.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567841</id>
	<title>XML/XSL/FOP/PDF</title>
	<author>sgrover</author>
	<datestamp>1246551240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I use XML/XSL to render my content as needed  - including images and SVG graphics where needed.  Then I use the <a href="http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/fop/" title="apache.org" rel="nofollow">FOP</a> [apache.org] project to convert the generated XML-FO into PDF.  Works great and can be scripted easily.  But the learning curve is kinda steep.  Luckily there are a few <a href="http://grover.open2space.com/node/213" title="open2space.com" rel="nofollow">tutorials</a> [open2space.com] out there.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I use XML/XSL to render my content as needed - including images and SVG graphics where needed .
Then I use the FOP [ apache.org ] project to convert the generated XML-FO into PDF .
Works great and can be scripted easily .
But the learning curve is kinda steep .
Luckily there are a few tutorials [ open2space.com ] out there .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I use XML/XSL to render my content as needed  - including images and SVG graphics where needed.
Then I use the FOP [apache.org] project to convert the generated XML-FO into PDF.
Works great and can be scripted easily.
But the learning curve is kinda steep.
Luckily there are a few tutorials [open2space.com] out there.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163</id>
	<title>texexplorer</title>
	<author>e**(i pi)-1</author>
	<datestamp>1246553940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>yes, latex is nice, but it would be even better, if basic TeX would<br>be understood by browsers.&nbsp; About 10 years ago, IBM had a cool plugin called texexplorer.<br>The plugin would compile latex on the fly. No need to publish a PDF. It worked<br>pretty well for basic documents which would not rely on macros.<br><br>Still, to address the question of the submitter, it would be nice to have something like<br><br>&lt;latex&gt;<br>$\int\_0^1&nbsp; \frac{\sqrt{\sin(x)}}{1+x^2} \; dx$.<br>&lt;/latex&gt;<br><br>It would not have to be the full latex stack but the ability to place mini latex pages into<br>HTML documents. Its a pity techexplorer technology seems have disappeared. If IBM would<br>opensource it, it could become an add-on for firefox.<br></tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>yes , latex is nice , but it would be even better , if basic TeX wouldbe understood by browsers.   About 10 years ago , IBM had a cool plugin called texexplorer.The plugin would compile latex on the fly .
No need to publish a PDF .
It workedpretty well for basic documents which would not rely on macros.Still , to address the question of the submitter , it would be nice to have something like $ \ int \ _0 ^ 1   \ frac { \ sqrt { \ sin ( x ) } } { 1 + x ^ 2 } \ ; dx $ .It would not have to be the full latex stack but the ability to place mini latex pages intoHTML documents .
Its a pity techexplorer technology seems have disappeared .
If IBM wouldopensource it , it could become an add-on for firefox .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>yes, latex is nice, but it would be even better, if basic TeX wouldbe understood by browsers.  About 10 years ago, IBM had a cool plugin called texexplorer.The plugin would compile latex on the fly.
No need to publish a PDF.
It workedpretty well for basic documents which would not rely on macros.Still, to address the question of the submitter, it would be nice to have something like$\int\_0^1  \frac{\sqrt{\sin(x)}}{1+x^2} \; dx$.It would not have to be the full latex stack but the ability to place mini latex pages intoHTML documents.
Its a pity techexplorer technology seems have disappeared.
If IBM wouldopensource it, it could become an add-on for firefox.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571773</id>
	<title>wrong tool for the job</title>
	<author>j1mmy</author>
	<datestamp>1246636500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>while you can mark up your HTML with CSS for print media, why bother? when i send documents around i almost always send PDF's since they'll look the same in just about every reader. if it's something somebody else needs to edit, then i usually go with an MS Word document, which is a very portable format these days.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>while you can mark up your HTML with CSS for print media , why bother ?
when i send documents around i almost always send PDF 's since they 'll look the same in just about every reader .
if it 's something somebody else needs to edit , then i usually go with an MS Word document , which is a very portable format these days .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>while you can mark up your HTML with CSS for print media, why bother?
when i send documents around i almost always send PDF's since they'll look the same in just about every reader.
if it's something somebody else needs to edit, then i usually go with an MS Word document, which is a very portable format these days.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567697</id>
	<title>Have you looked at PrinceXML?</title>
	<author>sandford</author>
	<datestamp>1246549740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>Is there a reason you don't want to use CSS? Because, there are already CSS extensions that do exactly what you want. The book Cascading Style Sheets - Designing for the web, was written using only HTML and CSS and prepped for printing using PrinceXML. The PrinceXML web site has a bunch of HTML+CSS similar samples, including academic papers.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Is there a reason you do n't want to use CSS ?
Because , there are already CSS extensions that do exactly what you want .
The book Cascading Style Sheets - Designing for the web , was written using only HTML and CSS and prepped for printing using PrinceXML .
The PrinceXML web site has a bunch of HTML + CSS similar samples , including academic papers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Is there a reason you don't want to use CSS?
Because, there are already CSS extensions that do exactly what you want.
The book Cascading Style Sheets - Designing for the web, was written using only HTML and CSS and prepped for printing using PrinceXML.
The PrinceXML web site has a bunch of HTML+CSS similar samples, including academic papers.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571211</id>
	<title>A few days earlier...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246633200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At university in the 1990s, I found that most of my professors and TAs preferred typewritten manuscript or a good approximation. So I edited non-paginated, single-spaced ASCII text in Emacs, using the Emacs text justification mode to reflow paragraphs with line breaks. I used enscript to print to school printers while inserting header/footer data and page numbering.  I used the enscript options to also spread the text out into a double-spaced print format with a fixed-pitch courier font.  The teaching staff liked it, and I didn't waste time on silly presentation issues.</p><p>For cross-references, I found most professors accepted any reasonably standard reference variant, so I chose a liberal arts format with end notes and "(AuthXY)" references to author name (abbreviated) and year of publication. I opened the same text file in Emacs with two Emacs windows so I could keep one editing cursor where I was in the main text, and easily insert new references and see both the entry and the reference key in the main text at the same time.  Since they were not numbered sequentially, there was no issue of relabling them every time I inserted more references.  This left me with a nice editable "source file" that looked good on screen, and totally functional print formatting.  Once in a while, I inserted a literal ^L character to force pagination boundaries.</p><p>I started using latex when I needed to work with lots of quasi-mathematical notation in both Computer Science and Philosophy, including many subscripts and superscripts on deeply nested bracket forms.  I later learned to insert vector graphics, and applied my computer knowledge to have a nice Makefile to rebuild my full latex document from source files.  You haven't lived until you do this under a version-control system and then start collaborating with multiple authors checking out and incrementally modifying the source files.</p><p>I found it liberating to work with textual source formats and ignore formatting for the most part. And this is after growing up with WordStar on CP/M and then learning proper use of paragraph styles with AmiPro (?) on Windows 3.0/3.1.  I am aware that my education and career has changed my whole way of thinking about information workflows. Unfortunately, I have yet to see how to bring the fruits of my labors to the masses, as it seems you have to undergo this wholesale cognitive conversion before you can start to appreciate better ways of managing your information. It is too easy to take an "easy" way out and then find yourself trapped with poor quality tools and methods.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At university in the 1990s , I found that most of my professors and TAs preferred typewritten manuscript or a good approximation .
So I edited non-paginated , single-spaced ASCII text in Emacs , using the Emacs text justification mode to reflow paragraphs with line breaks .
I used enscript to print to school printers while inserting header/footer data and page numbering .
I used the enscript options to also spread the text out into a double-spaced print format with a fixed-pitch courier font .
The teaching staff liked it , and I did n't waste time on silly presentation issues.For cross-references , I found most professors accepted any reasonably standard reference variant , so I chose a liberal arts format with end notes and " ( AuthXY ) " references to author name ( abbreviated ) and year of publication .
I opened the same text file in Emacs with two Emacs windows so I could keep one editing cursor where I was in the main text , and easily insert new references and see both the entry and the reference key in the main text at the same time .
Since they were not numbered sequentially , there was no issue of relabling them every time I inserted more references .
This left me with a nice editable " source file " that looked good on screen , and totally functional print formatting .
Once in a while , I inserted a literal ^ L character to force pagination boundaries.I started using latex when I needed to work with lots of quasi-mathematical notation in both Computer Science and Philosophy , including many subscripts and superscripts on deeply nested bracket forms .
I later learned to insert vector graphics , and applied my computer knowledge to have a nice Makefile to rebuild my full latex document from source files .
You have n't lived until you do this under a version-control system and then start collaborating with multiple authors checking out and incrementally modifying the source files.I found it liberating to work with textual source formats and ignore formatting for the most part .
And this is after growing up with WordStar on CP/M and then learning proper use of paragraph styles with AmiPro ( ?
) on Windows 3.0/3.1 .
I am aware that my education and career has changed my whole way of thinking about information workflows .
Unfortunately , I have yet to see how to bring the fruits of my labors to the masses , as it seems you have to undergo this wholesale cognitive conversion before you can start to appreciate better ways of managing your information .
It is too easy to take an " easy " way out and then find yourself trapped with poor quality tools and methods .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At university in the 1990s, I found that most of my professors and TAs preferred typewritten manuscript or a good approximation.
So I edited non-paginated, single-spaced ASCII text in Emacs, using the Emacs text justification mode to reflow paragraphs with line breaks.
I used enscript to print to school printers while inserting header/footer data and page numbering.
I used the enscript options to also spread the text out into a double-spaced print format with a fixed-pitch courier font.
The teaching staff liked it, and I didn't waste time on silly presentation issues.For cross-references, I found most professors accepted any reasonably standard reference variant, so I chose a liberal arts format with end notes and "(AuthXY)" references to author name (abbreviated) and year of publication.
I opened the same text file in Emacs with two Emacs windows so I could keep one editing cursor where I was in the main text, and easily insert new references and see both the entry and the reference key in the main text at the same time.
Since they were not numbered sequentially, there was no issue of relabling them every time I inserted more references.
This left me with a nice editable "source file" that looked good on screen, and totally functional print formatting.
Once in a while, I inserted a literal ^L character to force pagination boundaries.I started using latex when I needed to work with lots of quasi-mathematical notation in both Computer Science and Philosophy, including many subscripts and superscripts on deeply nested bracket forms.
I later learned to insert vector graphics, and applied my computer knowledge to have a nice Makefile to rebuild my full latex document from source files.
You haven't lived until you do this under a version-control system and then start collaborating with multiple authors checking out and incrementally modifying the source files.I found it liberating to work with textual source formats and ignore formatting for the most part.
And this is after growing up with WordStar on CP/M and then learning proper use of paragraph styles with AmiPro (?
) on Windows 3.0/3.1.
I am aware that my education and career has changed my whole way of thinking about information workflows.
Unfortunately, I have yet to see how to bring the fruits of my labors to the masses, as it seems you have to undergo this wholesale cognitive conversion before you can start to appreciate better ways of managing your information.
It is too easy to take an "easy" way out and then find yourself trapped with poor quality tools and methods.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571563</id>
	<title>Re:You're on the right track, for the wrong reason</title>
	<author>greyhueofdoubt</author>
	<datestamp>1246635420000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Our technical order system uses chapter/section/paragraph numbers in addition to page numbers; the page numbers are completely useless as they can change with new updates but the content always stays under the same paragraph.</p><p>So you have chapter 7, section 2, paragraph 5: 7.2.5, How to do this task, and then 7.2.6, How to inspect this task, etc. If an update comes up for the task, the page is replaced and the new paragraph is added inline: 7.2.5.1, Something we forgot about this task.</p><p>With electronic documents becoming more and more widespread, I would assume that this numbering would become more popular. It's easy to use, fine-grained (there are multiple paragraphs per page=more precise notations), and you can expand on it in place. No more, "Ok class turn to page 119, except for those of you who have the textbook with the lion on the cover, you'll need to read the first paragraph on page 117 and the middle paragraph on page 120."</p><p>My 2 cents.</p><p>-b</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Our technical order system uses chapter/section/paragraph numbers in addition to page numbers ; the page numbers are completely useless as they can change with new updates but the content always stays under the same paragraph.So you have chapter 7 , section 2 , paragraph 5 : 7.2.5 , How to do this task , and then 7.2.6 , How to inspect this task , etc .
If an update comes up for the task , the page is replaced and the new paragraph is added inline : 7.2.5.1 , Something we forgot about this task.With electronic documents becoming more and more widespread , I would assume that this numbering would become more popular .
It 's easy to use , fine-grained ( there are multiple paragraphs per page = more precise notations ) , and you can expand on it in place .
No more , " Ok class turn to page 119 , except for those of you who have the textbook with the lion on the cover , you 'll need to read the first paragraph on page 117 and the middle paragraph on page 120 .
" My 2 cents.-b</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Our technical order system uses chapter/section/paragraph numbers in addition to page numbers; the page numbers are completely useless as they can change with new updates but the content always stays under the same paragraph.So you have chapter 7, section 2, paragraph 5: 7.2.5, How to do this task, and then 7.2.6, How to inspect this task, etc.
If an update comes up for the task, the page is replaced and the new paragraph is added inline: 7.2.5.1, Something we forgot about this task.With electronic documents becoming more and more widespread, I would assume that this numbering would become more popular.
It's easy to use, fine-grained (there are multiple paragraphs per page=more precise notations), and you can expand on it in place.
No more, "Ok class turn to page 119, except for those of you who have the textbook with the lion on the cover, you'll need to read the first paragraph on page 117 and the middle paragraph on page 120.
"My 2 cents.-b</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568327</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568965</id>
	<title>Re:In my day</title>
	<author>crankyspice</author>
	<datestamp>1246564140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>I used netscape communicator to write all my papers for uni, mainly because it was available under windows and unix (IRIX in our case) and could be read by anyone on any platform.</p></div></blockquote><p>I did the same thing, mostly because I dual-booted between Windows NT and Slackware Linux.  Actually, Netscape was (before I learned LaTeX etc) the only app I could get decent formatted printing out of, on my PCL3 HP DeskJet 400, on Linux, circa 1996.  (I was a n00b.  I don't think I'd even discovered a2ps yet!)</p><p>But that was before my academic work had to include footnotes, cross-references within the document, etc.  Writing papers in HTML was use of a simpler tool, from a more civilized age.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p><p>These days for me it's OpenOffice.org FTW, it's not perfect but it's usable for what I need it to do (mostly keeping contract revisions straight, with cross-references and changes tracked, etc).  Still cross-platform, much better results.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>I used netscape communicator to write all my papers for uni , mainly because it was available under windows and unix ( IRIX in our case ) and could be read by anyone on any platform.I did the same thing , mostly because I dual-booted between Windows NT and Slackware Linux .
Actually , Netscape was ( before I learned LaTeX etc ) the only app I could get decent formatted printing out of , on my PCL3 HP DeskJet 400 , on Linux , circa 1996 .
( I was a n00b .
I do n't think I 'd even discovered a2ps yet !
) But that was before my academic work had to include footnotes , cross-references within the document , etc .
Writing papers in HTML was use of a simpler tool , from a more civilized age .
; ) These days for me it 's OpenOffice.org FTW , it 's not perfect but it 's usable for what I need it to do ( mostly keeping contract revisions straight , with cross-references and changes tracked , etc ) .
Still cross-platform , much better results .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used netscape communicator to write all my papers for uni, mainly because it was available under windows and unix (IRIX in our case) and could be read by anyone on any platform.I did the same thing, mostly because I dual-booted between Windows NT and Slackware Linux.
Actually, Netscape was (before I learned LaTeX etc) the only app I could get decent formatted printing out of, on my PCL3 HP DeskJet 400, on Linux, circa 1996.
(I was a n00b.
I don't think I'd even discovered a2ps yet!
)But that was before my academic work had to include footnotes, cross-references within the document, etc.
Writing papers in HTML was use of a simpler tool, from a more civilized age.
;)These days for me it's OpenOffice.org FTW, it's not perfect but it's usable for what I need it to do (mostly keeping contract revisions straight, with cross-references and changes tracked, etc).
Still cross-platform, much better results.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568747</id>
	<title>Let CSS work for you!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246561200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><tt>&lt;html&gt;<br>&nbsp; &lt;head&gt;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;title&gt;Abstract of a usable design&lt;/title&gt;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;style type="text/css"&gt;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; @media print {<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;body { margin: 2.5cm; }<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; }<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; @media screen {<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;body { margin:&nbsp; 50px; width: 50\%; }<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; }<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; body { font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; }<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;/style&gt;<br>&nbsp; &lt;/head&gt;<br>&nbsp; &lt;body&gt;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;h1&gt;It's so crazy it just might work&lt;/h2&gt;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;h2&gt;and other html inspired musings&lt;/h2&gt;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;p&gt;Why not just use css?&lt;/p&gt;<br>&nbsp; &nbsp; &lt;p&gt;Also, don't worry about page numbering. that's the browser's job.&lt;/p&gt;<br>&nbsp; &lt;/body&gt;<br>&lt;/html&gt;</tt></htmltext>
<tokenext>      Abstract of a usable design           @ media print {           body { margin : 2.5cm ; }       }       @ media screen {           body { margin :   50px ; width : 50 \ % ; }       }       body { font-family : sans-serif ; font-size : 12pt ; }             It 's so crazy it just might work     and other html inspired musings     Why not just use css ?     Also , do n't worry about page numbering .
that 's the browser 's job.  </tokentext>
<sentencetext>      Abstract of a usable design          @media print {         body { margin: 2.5cm; }      }      @media screen {         body { margin:  50px; width: 50\%; }      }      body { font-family: sans-serif; font-size: 12pt; }            It's so crazy it just might work    and other html inspired musings    Why not just use css?    Also, don't worry about page numbering.
that's the browser's job.  </sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569123</id>
	<title>Re:Don't use HTML</title>
	<author>Will.Woodhull</author>
	<datestamp>1246653300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>You wouldn't want to use HTML for something like this, especially with newer versions of HTML</p></div><p>Well, that sort of depends on where the value of the paper is.

</p><p>Some academic papers are pure fluff, and-- you are right-- these do not fare well in a semantic mark-up language like HTML. If there is no meaning in the content, then the semantic tags are being applied in a purely arbitrary manner and the result ends up looking as void of sense as it is actually is. OTOH, if the content of the academic paper has meaning, then the semantic mark-up of HTML will emphasize this meaning and make it clear to the bots and spiders that index the web, and the paper will be quickly integrated into the universal library of knowledge that is being built. That's a good thing.

</p><p>As far as appearances go, once the semantics are done properly, then CSS can style the paper so it presents well on the screen and, through the modern miracle of "@media print", it can also produce quality hardcopy.

</p><p>It is true that it would be very difficult with today's CSS to generate the kind of detailed hardcopy formatting needed to comply with the American Psychological Association's standards and other, similar, standards. But these standards were put into place to enforce a common semantic meaning on whitespace and typography usage; they were actually attemptng to do the same thing on paper that HTML semantic tags succeed in doing in digital formats. They are increasingly being replaced by HTML (since HTML does this so much better). It has been many long years since I've heard any academics talking wishfully about page scanning machines that could run through the last five years of JAMA journals and extract all the citations. Now you can do that with a few lines of script built around a regex that searches for &lt;cite&gt; tags...</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You would n't want to use HTML for something like this , especially with newer versions of HTMLWell , that sort of depends on where the value of the paper is .
Some academic papers are pure fluff , and-- you are right-- these do not fare well in a semantic mark-up language like HTML .
If there is no meaning in the content , then the semantic tags are being applied in a purely arbitrary manner and the result ends up looking as void of sense as it is actually is .
OTOH , if the content of the academic paper has meaning , then the semantic mark-up of HTML will emphasize this meaning and make it clear to the bots and spiders that index the web , and the paper will be quickly integrated into the universal library of knowledge that is being built .
That 's a good thing .
As far as appearances go , once the semantics are done properly , then CSS can style the paper so it presents well on the screen and , through the modern miracle of " @ media print " , it can also produce quality hardcopy .
It is true that it would be very difficult with today 's CSS to generate the kind of detailed hardcopy formatting needed to comply with the American Psychological Association 's standards and other , similar , standards .
But these standards were put into place to enforce a common semantic meaning on whitespace and typography usage ; they were actually attemptng to do the same thing on paper that HTML semantic tags succeed in doing in digital formats .
They are increasingly being replaced by HTML ( since HTML does this so much better ) .
It has been many long years since I 've heard any academics talking wishfully about page scanning machines that could run through the last five years of JAMA journals and extract all the citations .
Now you can do that with a few lines of script built around a regex that searches for tags.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You wouldn't want to use HTML for something like this, especially with newer versions of HTMLWell, that sort of depends on where the value of the paper is.
Some academic papers are pure fluff, and-- you are right-- these do not fare well in a semantic mark-up language like HTML.
If there is no meaning in the content, then the semantic tags are being applied in a purely arbitrary manner and the result ends up looking as void of sense as it is actually is.
OTOH, if the content of the academic paper has meaning, then the semantic mark-up of HTML will emphasize this meaning and make it clear to the bots and spiders that index the web, and the paper will be quickly integrated into the universal library of knowledge that is being built.
That's a good thing.
As far as appearances go, once the semantics are done properly, then CSS can style the paper so it presents well on the screen and, through the modern miracle of "@media print", it can also produce quality hardcopy.
It is true that it would be very difficult with today's CSS to generate the kind of detailed hardcopy formatting needed to comply with the American Psychological Association's standards and other, similar, standards.
But these standards were put into place to enforce a common semantic meaning on whitespace and typography usage; they were actually attemptng to do the same thing on paper that HTML semantic tags succeed in doing in digital formats.
They are increasingly being replaced by HTML (since HTML does this so much better).
It has been many long years since I've heard any academics talking wishfully about page scanning machines that could run through the last five years of JAMA journals and extract all the citations.
Now you can do that with a few lines of script built around a regex that searches for  tags...
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567837</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569169</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246653840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><blockquote><div><p>You seem to be talking about LaTex. It already exists. Don't reinvent it.</p></div></blockquote><p>Another alternative is RTF,</p></div><p>Read the fucking comma?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>You seem to be talking about LaTex .
It already exists .
Do n't reinvent it.Another alternative is RTF,Read the fucking comma ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You seem to be talking about LaTex.
It already exists.
Don't reinvent it.Another alternative is RTF,Read the fucking comma?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568661</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>pjpII</author>
	<datestamp>1246560240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Latex is really the solution.  There is no reason to reinvent the wheel.  In fact, reinventing the wheel might cause problems when submitting papers.  From what I have seen, many academic journals prefer<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.tex and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.eps files. I can't imagine what they would do with HTML.</p></div><p>Actually, that may be true of some academic journals, but most deal primarily with MS Word documents. Some publishers might grudgingly deal with Latex documents (I know John Benjamin's mentions it in their style requirements), but the people who run conferences and therefore are in charge of submitting the proceedings tend not to be computer saavy enough to work with anything other than MS Word files (god save whoever has to deal with the millions of random fonts people use, use/non-use of styles, etc).</p><p>This of course depends on your field - in Comp Sci, I'd wager there're many more journals that regularly accept latex files. In linguistics, it's somewhat rarer, and as you get further into the humanities, it becomes increasingly difficult to find anyone who's heard of Latex at all.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Latex is really the solution .
There is no reason to reinvent the wheel .
In fact , reinventing the wheel might cause problems when submitting papers .
From what I have seen , many academic journals prefer .tex and .eps files .
I ca n't imagine what they would do with HTML.Actually , that may be true of some academic journals , but most deal primarily with MS Word documents .
Some publishers might grudgingly deal with Latex documents ( I know John Benjamin 's mentions it in their style requirements ) , but the people who run conferences and therefore are in charge of submitting the proceedings tend not to be computer saavy enough to work with anything other than MS Word files ( god save whoever has to deal with the millions of random fonts people use , use/non-use of styles , etc ) .This of course depends on your field - in Comp Sci , I 'd wager there 're many more journals that regularly accept latex files .
In linguistics , it 's somewhat rarer , and as you get further into the humanities , it becomes increasingly difficult to find anyone who 's heard of Latex at all .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Latex is really the solution.
There is no reason to reinvent the wheel.
In fact, reinventing the wheel might cause problems when submitting papers.
From what I have seen, many academic journals prefer .tex and .eps files.
I can't imagine what they would do with HTML.Actually, that may be true of some academic journals, but most deal primarily with MS Word documents.
Some publishers might grudgingly deal with Latex documents (I know John Benjamin's mentions it in their style requirements), but the people who run conferences and therefore are in charge of submitting the proceedings tend not to be computer saavy enough to work with anything other than MS Word files (god save whoever has to deal with the millions of random fonts people use, use/non-use of styles, etc).This of course depends on your field - in Comp Sci, I'd wager there're many more journals that regularly accept latex files.
In linguistics, it's somewhat rarer, and as you get further into the humanities, it becomes increasingly difficult to find anyone who's heard of Latex at all.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28573511</id>
	<title>Re:texexplorer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246647120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>http://math.etsu.edu/LaTeXMathML/</p><p>Might be what you want.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>http : //math.etsu.edu/LaTeXMathML/Might be what you want .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>http://math.etsu.edu/LaTeXMathML/Might be what you want.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570737</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246630080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RTF is not a sister SGML language of HTML. XML is.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RTF is not a sister SGML language of HTML .
XML is .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RTF is not a sister SGML language of HTML.
XML is.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568381</id>
	<title>Universality of HTML</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246556400000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>You can embed CSS in HTML pages; that should do what you want, if you have another way of dividing up the right amount of information per page.</p><p>Although this is slightly more complicated, I'd look to an XML/XSLT/CSS solution instead. It would enable you to take a source document, split it into pages by paragraph or size, and then format those pages, all while keeping the raw data in XML in the case the user wanted to use another reader.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>You can embed CSS in HTML pages ; that should do what you want , if you have another way of dividing up the right amount of information per page.Although this is slightly more complicated , I 'd look to an XML/XSLT/CSS solution instead .
It would enable you to take a source document , split it into pages by paragraph or size , and then format those pages , all while keeping the raw data in XML in the case the user wanted to use another reader .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>You can embed CSS in HTML pages; that should do what you want, if you have another way of dividing up the right amount of information per page.Although this is slightly more complicated, I'd look to an XML/XSLT/CSS solution instead.
It would enable you to take a source document, split it into pages by paragraph or size, and then format those pages, all while keeping the raw data in XML in the case the user wanted to use another reader.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568063</id>
	<title>Prince XML</title>
	<author>cwt137</author>
	<datestamp>1246553040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>I think writing papers using XHTML and CSS 2.1 or 3 is a good idea. Then you can use Prince XML to convert it to PDF. Their site has a <a href="http://www.princexml.com/samples/" title="princexml.com" rel="nofollow">nice sample</a> [princexml.com] or two of journal articles / conference papers. The quality of the renderer is great. It was even used to create a professional book, <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Cascading-Style-Sheets-Designing-Web/dp/0321193121" title="amazon.com" rel="nofollow">Cascading Style Sheets: Designing for the Web</a> [amazon.com].</htmltext>
<tokenext>I think writing papers using XHTML and CSS 2.1 or 3 is a good idea .
Then you can use Prince XML to convert it to PDF .
Their site has a nice sample [ princexml.com ] or two of journal articles / conference papers .
The quality of the renderer is great .
It was even used to create a professional book , Cascading Style Sheets : Designing for the Web [ amazon.com ] .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think writing papers using XHTML and CSS 2.1 or 3 is a good idea.
Then you can use Prince XML to convert it to PDF.
Their site has a nice sample [princexml.com] or two of journal articles / conference papers.
The quality of the renderer is great.
It was even used to create a professional book, Cascading Style Sheets: Designing for the Web [amazon.com].</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568405</id>
	<title>He wants us to reverse-engineer SGML from HTML?</title>
	<author>kenh</author>
	<datestamp>1246556760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>SGML pre-dated HTML, in fact, HTML is (in many ways) a subset of SGML.</p><p>I suspect the poster never heard of SGML, or it's predecessor GML</p><p>Here's a link to a good book on the subject in Google Books: <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=RilvKya0EnwC&amp;dq=sgml&amp;printsec=frontcover&amp;source=bl&amp;ots=JBNHxEXJ32&amp;sig=UVJgpeklQNq7sZ7b3aBnNUeYNEk&amp;hl=en&amp;ei=2YtNSrDoM9eJtgfK2\_yxBA&amp;sa=X&amp;oi=book\_result&amp;ct=result&amp;resnum=8" title="google.com">The SGML Book</a> [google.com]</p><p>There is also DOCBOOK and LaTex..</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>SGML pre-dated HTML , in fact , HTML is ( in many ways ) a subset of SGML.I suspect the poster never heard of SGML , or it 's predecessor GMLHere 's a link to a good book on the subject in Google Books : The SGML Book [ google.com ] There is also DOCBOOK and LaTex. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>SGML pre-dated HTML, in fact, HTML is (in many ways) a subset of SGML.I suspect the poster never heard of SGML, or it's predecessor GMLHere's a link to a good book on the subject in Google Books: The SGML Book [google.com]There is also DOCBOOK and LaTex..</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568185</id>
	<title>A solution requires a problem</title>
	<author>carlzum</author>
	<datestamp>1246554180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What is it you're trying to accomplish? Non-standard HTML is certainly not a solution for whatever printing problem you're having, and it eliminates the benefits of HTML. Listen to everyone else that's responded. LaTeX solves most gripes people have with word processors, stick with CSS if you have a compelling reason to use HTML, and look into Docbook XML if you're not happy with the first two options.
<br> <br>
If you want to use HTML just to prove it can be done, go for it if you think it sounds fun. But if you're serious about using it for publishing, forget it. No one's going to accept a homegrown HTML file for printing.</htmltext>
<tokenext>What is it you 're trying to accomplish ?
Non-standard HTML is certainly not a solution for whatever printing problem you 're having , and it eliminates the benefits of HTML .
Listen to everyone else that 's responded .
LaTeX solves most gripes people have with word processors , stick with CSS if you have a compelling reason to use HTML , and look into Docbook XML if you 're not happy with the first two options .
If you want to use HTML just to prove it can be done , go for it if you think it sounds fun .
But if you 're serious about using it for publishing , forget it .
No one 's going to accept a homegrown HTML file for printing .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What is it you're trying to accomplish?
Non-standard HTML is certainly not a solution for whatever printing problem you're having, and it eliminates the benefits of HTML.
Listen to everyone else that's responded.
LaTeX solves most gripes people have with word processors, stick with CSS if you have a compelling reason to use HTML, and look into Docbook XML if you're not happy with the first two options.
If you want to use HTML just to prove it can be done, go for it if you think it sounds fun.
But if you're serious about using it for publishing, forget it.
No one's going to accept a homegrown HTML file for printing.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568161</id>
	<title>LyX + LaTeX ... DUH!</title>
	<author>WolphFang</author>
	<datestamp>1246553940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>LyX + LaTeX<nobr> <wbr></nobr>... DUH!

It even makes it easy to take public domain OCR'ed books and reset them into something extremely nice.... *quickly*</htmltext>
<tokenext>LyX + LaTeX ... DUH ! It even makes it easy to take public domain OCR'ed books and reset them into something extremely nice.... * quickly *</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LyX + LaTeX ... DUH!

It even makes it easy to take public domain OCR'ed books and reset them into something extremely nice.... *quickly*</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570231</id>
	<title>Bring me the OP so I can shoot him...</title>
	<author>Shaiku</author>
	<datestamp>1246625640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Hacked up HTML as our universal word processing format?

That has to be the most naive -- no, the dumbest fucking idea I have ever heard in my entire life.

For a full explanation of why, take 50 cents and go buy an education.  It should be obvious to anybody that HTML was a complete failure in interoperability and it is one of the clumsiest protocols to try and use when it comes to content presentation.  As others have already pointed out repeatedly, there already exist better mousetraps for this problem anyway.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Hacked up HTML as our universal word processing format ?
That has to be the most naive -- no , the dumbest fucking idea I have ever heard in my entire life .
For a full explanation of why , take 50 cents and go buy an education .
It should be obvious to anybody that HTML was a complete failure in interoperability and it is one of the clumsiest protocols to try and use when it comes to content presentation .
As others have already pointed out repeatedly , there already exist better mousetraps for this problem anyway .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Hacked up HTML as our universal word processing format?
That has to be the most naive -- no, the dumbest fucking idea I have ever heard in my entire life.
For a full explanation of why, take 50 cents and go buy an education.
It should be obvious to anybody that HTML was a complete failure in interoperability and it is one of the clumsiest protocols to try and use when it comes to content presentation.
As others have already pointed out repeatedly, there already exist better mousetraps for this problem anyway.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571593</id>
	<title>Meaning Vs Presentation</title>
	<author>Ractive</author>
	<datestamp>1246635660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>The trend (and not an unjustified one) is to separate structure from presentation in HTML so THE WEB can be <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantic\_web" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow"> browsed and searched in a a more meaningful way </a> [wikipedia.org] so CSS is used for display and tags are used to markup structure <br>
Since what you are suggesting is a mix of structure and display needs, it doesn't make a lot of sense to introduce it all in HTML, it would be like going back to the 90's, nevertheless it can already be achieved by separating the components you suggest in structural and display and surely you will find solutions for what you intend using a combination of existing HTML - CSS techniques. <br>
Also HTML was not created and is not primarily oriented for printed documents, it's native purpose is for on-screen display so it's not surprising that these features are not naturally supported in the core of the language.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The trend ( and not an unjustified one ) is to separate structure from presentation in HTML so THE WEB can be browsed and searched in a a more meaningful way [ wikipedia.org ] so CSS is used for display and tags are used to markup structure Since what you are suggesting is a mix of structure and display needs , it does n't make a lot of sense to introduce it all in HTML , it would be like going back to the 90 's , nevertheless it can already be achieved by separating the components you suggest in structural and display and surely you will find solutions for what you intend using a combination of existing HTML - CSS techniques .
Also HTML was not created and is not primarily oriented for printed documents , it 's native purpose is for on-screen display so it 's not surprising that these features are not naturally supported in the core of the language .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The trend (and not an unjustified one) is to separate structure from presentation in HTML so THE WEB can be  browsed and searched in a a more meaningful way  [wikipedia.org] so CSS is used for display and tags are used to markup structure 
Since what you are suggesting is a mix of structure and display needs, it doesn't make a lot of sense to introduce it all in HTML, it would be like going back to the 90's, nevertheless it can already be achieved by separating the components you suggest in structural and display and surely you will find solutions for what you intend using a combination of existing HTML - CSS techniques.
Also HTML was not created and is not primarily oriented for printed documents, it's native purpose is for on-screen display so it's not surprising that these features are not naturally supported in the core of the language.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569509</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>thogard</author>
	<datestamp>1246615500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LaTeX isn't the solution but its close.  LaTeX is just a complex module that defines lots of macros that makes it easy to produce TeX document.</p><p>The proper solution is TeX with a new web module that does more modern and web based macros.  Get that into Firefox and a free module for IE and people will start to use it and HTML can die the death it deserved back in the 1980s.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LaTeX is n't the solution but its close .
LaTeX is just a complex module that defines lots of macros that makes it easy to produce TeX document.The proper solution is TeX with a new web module that does more modern and web based macros .
Get that into Firefox and a free module for IE and people will start to use it and HTML can die the death it deserved back in the 1980s .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LaTeX isn't the solution but its close.
LaTeX is just a complex module that defines lots of macros that makes it easy to produce TeX document.The proper solution is TeX with a new web module that does more modern and web based macros.
Get that into Firefox and a free module for IE and people will start to use it and HTML can die the death it deserved back in the 1980s.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28576111</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>PDAllen</author>
	<datestamp>1246623900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I can tell you exactly what a journal would do with HTML: the same as they'd do with a word doc or a handwritten manuscript, namely charge you a fee for retyping.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I can tell you exactly what a journal would do with HTML : the same as they 'd do with a word doc or a handwritten manuscript , namely charge you a fee for retyping .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I can tell you exactly what a journal would do with HTML: the same as they'd do with a word doc or a handwritten manuscript, namely charge you a fee for retyping.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569909</id>
	<title>Do you know latex?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246620480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Use latex!</p><p>It's much more productive to write a document.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Use latex ! It 's much more productive to write a document .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Use latex!It's much more productive to write a document.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567755</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>nevhan</author>
	<datestamp>1246550340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Indeed, LaTex is standard in academia, I keep all my written work in LaTex format. I then usually convert to PDF for submission. Its pretty :</htmltext>
<tokenext>Indeed , LaTex is standard in academia , I keep all my written work in LaTex format .
I then usually convert to PDF for submission .
Its pretty :</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Indeed, LaTex is standard in academia, I keep all my written work in LaTex format.
I then usually convert to PDF for submission.
Its pretty :</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568355</id>
	<title>You want more tags? You want XML.</title>
	<author>jrharshath</author>
	<datestamp>1246555980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Since HTML wont add new tags for you, you could write your paper as XML, and use a stylesheet to display it in whatever fashion you want.

That way you could have "one column stylesheet", "two column stylesheet" etc formatting the same XML document in your favourite way of presenting it<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</htmltext>
<tokenext>Since HTML wont add new tags for you , you could write your paper as XML , and use a stylesheet to display it in whatever fashion you want .
That way you could have " one column stylesheet " , " two column stylesheet " etc formatting the same XML document in your favourite way of presenting it : )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Since HTML wont add new tags for you, you could write your paper as XML, and use a stylesheet to display it in whatever fashion you want.
That way you could have "one column stylesheet", "two column stylesheet" etc formatting the same XML document in your favourite way of presenting it :)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569143</id>
	<title>Structured text</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246653540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I'm not sure if this is precisely what you are looking for, but you might want to check out the various "structured text" systems.  For example, "reStructuredText":</p><p><a href="http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html" title="sourceforge.net" rel="nofollow">http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html</a> [sourceforge.net]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I 'm not sure if this is precisely what you are looking for , but you might want to check out the various " structured text " systems .
For example , " reStructuredText " : http : //docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html [ sourceforge.net ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I'm not sure if this is precisely what you are looking for, but you might want to check out the various "structured text" systems.
For example, "reStructuredText":http://docutils.sourceforge.net/rst.html [sourceforge.net]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28579569</id>
	<title>The problem is the concept of page.</title>
	<author>ResidentSourcerer</author>
	<datestamp>1246716720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>With paper publications, the publisher decided on a page size, and Vol 1, Issue 27, page 341 was the same for everyone.</p><p>The web has to be readable on everything from an iphone to a 2000 x 3000 pixel display.</p><p>Page is not relevant to web browsers.</p><p>As far as I can tell, the OP's big problem is the issue of bibliographic citation.  How do you cite a particular point in the text, ideally in a way that can be done both automatically on computer, and by people reading the paper copy.</p><p>Number the paragraphs.</p><p>Just as the various flavours of TeX have prescribed macro packages, an academic journal could have a prescribed CSS style sheet.</p><p>A citation then is in the form of author, article, paragraph number instead of page number.</p><p>There are details to hammer out:  Are tables given their own numbering or are they considered a paragraph. (Can be a real problem with floats.)  Illustrations/figures, section and subheads?  Stuff that has z-levels?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>With paper publications , the publisher decided on a page size , and Vol 1 , Issue 27 , page 341 was the same for everyone.The web has to be readable on everything from an iphone to a 2000 x 3000 pixel display.Page is not relevant to web browsers.As far as I can tell , the OP 's big problem is the issue of bibliographic citation .
How do you cite a particular point in the text , ideally in a way that can be done both automatically on computer , and by people reading the paper copy.Number the paragraphs.Just as the various flavours of TeX have prescribed macro packages , an academic journal could have a prescribed CSS style sheet.A citation then is in the form of author , article , paragraph number instead of page number.There are details to hammer out : Are tables given their own numbering or are they considered a paragraph .
( Can be a real problem with floats .
) Illustrations/figures , section and subheads ?
Stuff that has z-levels ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>With paper publications, the publisher decided on a page size, and Vol 1, Issue 27, page 341 was the same for everyone.The web has to be readable on everything from an iphone to a 2000 x 3000 pixel display.Page is not relevant to web browsers.As far as I can tell, the OP's big problem is the issue of bibliographic citation.
How do you cite a particular point in the text, ideally in a way that can be done both automatically on computer, and by people reading the paper copy.Number the paragraphs.Just as the various flavours of TeX have prescribed macro packages, an academic journal could have a prescribed CSS style sheet.A citation then is in the form of author, article, paragraph number instead of page number.There are details to hammer out:  Are tables given their own numbering or are they considered a paragraph.
(Can be a real problem with floats.
)  Illustrations/figures, section and subheads?
Stuff that has z-levels?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572017</id>
	<title>use jsMath, Re:texexplorer</title>
	<author>Petronius Arbiter</author>
	<datestamp>1246637820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>In pmwiki, you can include LaTeX math with this:</p><p> <a href="http://www.pmwiki.org/wiki/Cookbook/JsMath" title="pmwiki.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.pmwiki.org/wiki/Cookbook/JsMath</a> [pmwiki.org] </p><p>I've used it for some time and highly recommend it</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>In pmwiki , you can include LaTeX math with this : http : //www.pmwiki.org/wiki/Cookbook/JsMath [ pmwiki.org ] I 've used it for some time and highly recommend it</tokentext>
<sentencetext>In pmwiki, you can include LaTeX math with this: http://www.pmwiki.org/wiki/Cookbook/JsMath [pmwiki.org] I've used it for some time and highly recommend it</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28573645</id>
	<title>"Printing"</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246647960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>LOL</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>LOL</tokentext>
<sentencetext>LOL</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571517</id>
	<title>do not reinvent the wheel...</title>
	<author>kbdd</author>
	<datestamp>1246635120000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>The purpose of HTML is to display adequately (optimally?) across different display sizes (and resolutions). If you want the opposite (fixed size), there are other formats better suited like Postscript, PDF and Latex, among others. Do not reinvent the wheel.</htmltext>
<tokenext>The purpose of HTML is to display adequately ( optimally ?
) across different display sizes ( and resolutions ) .
If you want the opposite ( fixed size ) , there are other formats better suited like Postscript , PDF and Latex , among others .
Do not reinvent the wheel .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The purpose of HTML is to display adequately (optimally?
) across different display sizes (and resolutions).
If you want the opposite (fixed size), there are other formats better suited like Postscript, PDF and Latex, among others.
Do not reinvent the wheel.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570581</id>
	<title>RTF !=SGML descended</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246629060000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>if <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich\_Text\_Format" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich\_Text\_Format</a> [wikipedia.org] is to be believed, RTF owes more to TEX than to SGML, and it doesn't look like SGML to me at all.</p><p>RTF is a pure Microsoft "standard", and its versions reflect the respective capabilities of the current version of MS Word.</p><p>That notwithstanding, RTF is implemented relatively well in most word processors. If you restrict yourself to relatively simple formatting, there shouldn't be a lot of problems.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>if http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich \ _Text \ _Format [ wikipedia.org ] is to be believed , RTF owes more to TEX than to SGML , and it does n't look like SGML to me at all.RTF is a pure Microsoft " standard " , and its versions reflect the respective capabilities of the current version of MS Word.That notwithstanding , RTF is implemented relatively well in most word processors .
If you restrict yourself to relatively simple formatting , there should n't be a lot of problems .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>if http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rich\_Text\_Format [wikipedia.org] is to be believed, RTF owes more to TEX than to SGML, and it doesn't look like SGML to me at all.RTF is a pure Microsoft "standard", and its versions reflect the respective capabilities of the current version of MS Word.That notwithstanding, RTF is implemented relatively well in most word processors.
If you restrict yourself to relatively simple formatting, there shouldn't be a lot of problems.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568435</id>
	<title>Re:texexplorer</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246557000000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Take a look at the <a href="http://echochamber.me/viewtopic.php?f=17&amp;t=21939" title="echochamber.me" rel="nofollow">XKCD forums</a> [echochamber.me].  It's not exactly what you're looking for, but it's close.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Take a look at the XKCD forums [ echochamber.me ] .
It 's not exactly what you 're looking for , but it 's close .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Take a look at the XKCD forums [echochamber.me].
It's not exactly what you're looking for, but it's close.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567885</id>
	<title>In my day</title>
	<author>Barny</author>
	<datestamp>1246551600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I used netscape communicator to write all my papers for uni, mainly because it was available under windows and unix (IRIX in our case) and could be read by anyone on any platform.</p><p>It was a reasonably easy to use editor, without all the useless crap most others have.</p><p>A few lecturers were quite impressed with the idea, the portability and cost were big factors.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I used netscape communicator to write all my papers for uni , mainly because it was available under windows and unix ( IRIX in our case ) and could be read by anyone on any platform.It was a reasonably easy to use editor , without all the useless crap most others have.A few lecturers were quite impressed with the idea , the portability and cost were big factors .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I used netscape communicator to write all my papers for uni, mainly because it was available under windows and unix (IRIX in our case) and could be read by anyone on any platform.It was a reasonably easy to use editor, without all the useless crap most others have.A few lecturers were quite impressed with the idea, the portability and cost were big factors.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28573799</id>
	<title>Yes.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246649040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Yes, this is such a crazy idea.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yes , this is such a crazy idea .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yes, this is such a crazy idea.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569387</id>
	<title>restructuredtext...</title>
	<author>tyroneking</author>
	<datestamp>1246613880000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>is made for what you're talking about</p><p>Documents are written in human-readable text format - good for storing in version control and using for diffs<br>Python Docutils is used to convert to HTML and/or LaTeX and a few other formats<br>rst2pdf is a tool that converts to beautiful PDF (easier than using Docutils + LaTeX)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>is made for what you 're talking aboutDocuments are written in human-readable text format - good for storing in version control and using for diffsPython Docutils is used to convert to HTML and/or LaTeX and a few other formatsrst2pdf is a tool that converts to beautiful PDF ( easier than using Docutils + LaTeX )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>is made for what you're talking aboutDocuments are written in human-readable text format - good for storing in version control and using for diffsPython Docutils is used to convert to HTML and/or LaTeX and a few other formatsrst2pdf is a tool that converts to beautiful PDF (easier than using Docutils + LaTeX)</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567721</id>
	<title>Wrong, in many ways</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246549980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What you want (being able to define pages) is wrong in many many ways.</p><p>You should, as an authoring tool, never define a page, or its dimensions, especially academic works, which will be printed in different formats, on different paper (A4/Letter/Tradeback/etc/etc)</p><p>At most, whatever markup you have, many define things like page breaks, but even then, they are more a typesetting issue.</p><p>What you want is either LaTeX or DocBook.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What you want ( being able to define pages ) is wrong in many many ways.You should , as an authoring tool , never define a page , or its dimensions , especially academic works , which will be printed in different formats , on different paper ( A4/Letter/Tradeback/etc/etc ) At most , whatever markup you have , many define things like page breaks , but even then , they are more a typesetting issue.What you want is either LaTeX or DocBook .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What you want (being able to define pages) is wrong in many many ways.You should, as an authoring tool, never define a page, or its dimensions, especially academic works, which will be printed in different formats, on different paper (A4/Letter/Tradeback/etc/etc)At most, whatever markup you have, many define things like page breaks, but even then, they are more a typesetting issue.What you want is either LaTeX or DocBook.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568679</id>
	<title>Re:Have you looked at PrinceXML?</title>
	<author>shutdown -p now</author>
	<datestamp>1246560360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Thirded. <a href="http://www.princexml.com/" title="princexml.com">PrinceXML</a> [princexml.com] is precisely what you ask for. See the <a href="http://www.princexml.com/samples/" title="princexml.com">sample output</a> [princexml.com] and judge for yourself.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Thirded .
PrinceXML [ princexml.com ] is precisely what you ask for .
See the sample output [ princexml.com ] and judge for yourself .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Thirded.
PrinceXML [princexml.com] is precisely what you ask for.
See the sample output [princexml.com] and judge for yourself.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572673</id>
	<title>A4</title>
	<author>manaway</author>
	<datestamp>1246642080000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Parent's paper size is for US letter (8.5 x 11 inches). For <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A4\_paper#A\_series" title="wikipedia.org">A4</a> [wikipedia.org] (210 x 297 mm) with 25mm margins use:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>\geometry{papersize={210mm,297mm},total={185mm,272mm}}<br>

\pdfpagewidth 210mm<br>
\pdfpageheight 297mm</p> </div></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Parent 's paper size is for US letter ( 8.5 x 11 inches ) .
For A4 [ wikipedia.org ] ( 210 x 297 mm ) with 25mm margins use : \ geometry { papersize = { 210mm,297mm } ,total = { 185mm,272mm } } \ pdfpagewidth 210mm \ pdfpageheight 297mm</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Parent's paper size is for US letter (8.5 x 11 inches).
For A4 [wikipedia.org] (210 x 297 mm) with 25mm margins use:\geometry{papersize={210mm,297mm},total={185mm,272mm}}

\pdfpagewidth 210mm
\pdfpageheight 297mm 
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567829</id>
	<title>page breaks with css</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246551180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>From JavaScript Site <a href="http://www.javascriptkit.com/dhtmltutors/pagebreak.shtml" title="javascriptkit.com" rel="nofollow"> Page breaks with css</a> [javascriptkit.com]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>From JavaScript Site Page breaks with css [ javascriptkit.com ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>From JavaScript Site  Page breaks with css [javascriptkit.com]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570139</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246624380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>RTF is a "sister SGML language of HTML"? Huh???? It isn't even close! It's just a text version of the MS-Word doc file format and even the style definitions don't carry into the document body. Only in the most abstract sense is it related to SGML.</p><p>If you want professional-quality documents, select PostScript, PDF (PostScript encapsulated, not meaning EPS) or one of the TeX flavors.</p><p>Anything based on MS-Word and its ilk (including ODF), RTF (same thing, as I mentioned earlier) or HTML is dicey. All of these apps do their final typesetting by using the font metrics available on the computer where it was printed (NOT the computer where it was composed). It's not as noticeable these days thanks to extensive use of TrueType and similar soft fonts, but in the olden times when most of the fonts being used in document composition were the printer hardware fonts, you could get really badly messed-up line and page breaks just by composing on a machine with a different printer driver than the machine that the hardcopy was being produced on.</p><p>PostScript and TeX are based on absolute metrics. HTML and the various word processors are not.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>RTF is a " sister SGML language of HTML " ?
Huh ? ? ? ? It is n't even close !
It 's just a text version of the MS-Word doc file format and even the style definitions do n't carry into the document body .
Only in the most abstract sense is it related to SGML.If you want professional-quality documents , select PostScript , PDF ( PostScript encapsulated , not meaning EPS ) or one of the TeX flavors.Anything based on MS-Word and its ilk ( including ODF ) , RTF ( same thing , as I mentioned earlier ) or HTML is dicey .
All of these apps do their final typesetting by using the font metrics available on the computer where it was printed ( NOT the computer where it was composed ) .
It 's not as noticeable these days thanks to extensive use of TrueType and similar soft fonts , but in the olden times when most of the fonts being used in document composition were the printer hardware fonts , you could get really badly messed-up line and page breaks just by composing on a machine with a different printer driver than the machine that the hardcopy was being produced on.PostScript and TeX are based on absolute metrics .
HTML and the various word processors are not .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>RTF is a "sister SGML language of HTML"?
Huh???? It isn't even close!
It's just a text version of the MS-Word doc file format and even the style definitions don't carry into the document body.
Only in the most abstract sense is it related to SGML.If you want professional-quality documents, select PostScript, PDF (PostScript encapsulated, not meaning EPS) or one of the TeX flavors.Anything based on MS-Word and its ilk (including ODF), RTF (same thing, as I mentioned earlier) or HTML is dicey.
All of these apps do their final typesetting by using the font metrics available on the computer where it was printed (NOT the computer where it was composed).
It's not as noticeable these days thanks to extensive use of TrueType and similar soft fonts, but in the olden times when most of the fonts being used in document composition were the printer hardware fonts, you could get really badly messed-up line and page breaks just by composing on a machine with a different printer driver than the machine that the hardcopy was being produced on.PostScript and TeX are based on absolute metrics.
HTML and the various word processors are not.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567951</id>
	<title>Re:In my day</title>
	<author>brusk</author>
	<datestamp>1246552140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>How did you handle footnotes? Page numbers?</htmltext>
<tokenext>How did you handle footnotes ?
Page numbers ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>How did you handle footnotes?
Page numbers?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567885</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571381</id>
	<title>Page already exists in CSS/Media specific CSS</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246634340000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>What you want to do already exists. The W3C released media specific stylesheets, which allow you to create an HTML page with CSS optimized for the specific media you're using. It's most frequently used to create "printer friendly" versions of webpages without having to maintain two separate files. There's even an author who used HTML/CSS to create a book.</p><p>Practical information about using media specific stylesheets can be found at these articles:<br><a href="http://www.alistapart.com/articles/boom/" title="alistapart.com" rel="nofollow">Printing a Book with CSS: Boom!</a> [alistapart.com] by  Ha&aring;kon Wium Lie, Bert Bos<br><a href="http://www.alistapart.com/articles/alaprintstyles/" title="alistapart.com" rel="nofollow">ALAs New Print Styles</a> [alistapart.com] by Eric Meyer</p><p>W3C information:<br><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css-print/" title="w3.org" rel="nofollow">CSS Print Profile</a> [w3.org]<br><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/css3-page/" title="w3.org" rel="nofollow">CSS3 Module: Paged Media</a> [w3.org]<br><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-print/" title="w3.org" rel="nofollow">XHTML-Print</a> [w3.org]</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>What you want to do already exists .
The W3C released media specific stylesheets , which allow you to create an HTML page with CSS optimized for the specific media you 're using .
It 's most frequently used to create " printer friendly " versions of webpages without having to maintain two separate files .
There 's even an author who used HTML/CSS to create a book.Practical information about using media specific stylesheets can be found at these articles : Printing a Book with CSS : Boom !
[ alistapart.com ] by Ha   kon Wium Lie , Bert BosALAs New Print Styles [ alistapart.com ] by Eric MeyerW3C information : CSS Print Profile [ w3.org ] CSS3 Module : Paged Media [ w3.org ] XHTML-Print [ w3.org ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What you want to do already exists.
The W3C released media specific stylesheets, which allow you to create an HTML page with CSS optimized for the specific media you're using.
It's most frequently used to create "printer friendly" versions of webpages without having to maintain two separate files.
There's even an author who used HTML/CSS to create a book.Practical information about using media specific stylesheets can be found at these articles:Printing a Book with CSS: Boom!
[alistapart.com] by  Haåkon Wium Lie, Bert BosALAs New Print Styles [alistapart.com] by Eric MeyerW3C information:CSS Print Profile [w3.org]CSS3 Module: Paged Media [w3.org]XHTML-Print [w3.org]</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570107</id>
	<title>It's the browsers/editors, not the file format!</title>
	<author>frisket</author>
	<datestamp>1246623960000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HTML, especially XHTML, can already do what the OP describes, but browsers don't support all the bells and whistles needed for paper-like paged rendering. CSS goes some way towards meeting the deficiencies, but the end user still retains sufficient control to (perhaps unwittingly) defeat almost any attempt to force pagination and placement. It is tedious, but by no means impossible, to write documents of considerable complexity in HTML, as <a href="http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/39733/abstract?CRETRY=1&amp;SRETRY=0" title="wiley.com">I pointed out long ago</a> [wiley.com], but page support requires browser cooperation.</p><p>The only reliable answer at the moment is to provide multiple formats generated from a single source. An XML master (DocBook, TEI, whatever) can be used with XSLT to generate LaTeX source code for making a PDF, and the pagination data can be re-used in a subsequent XSLT script to generate paged HTML. The problem is the XML and LaTeX editors, which are unsuited for <em>writing</em> unless you learn about XML or LaTeX markup, and even the relatively smart ones don't implement a lot of the features needed for complex structured writing (<tt>&lt;plug&gt;</tt>come to <a href="http://www.balisage.net/2009/Program.html#FridayPlenary900am" title="balisage.net">Balisage</a> [balisage.net] to find out why<tt>&lt;/plug&gt;</tt>).</p><p>LyX and similar editors (Scientific Word, Textures) provide synchronous typographic interfaces to LaTeX, and TeX4ht provides excellent conversion to web pages and other formats. Even Word and OpenOffice, when used with named styles (with utter rigour) can be converted reliably to HTML, LaTeX and other outputs.</p><p>The last thing on earth we need is to increase the size of the HTML tagset: HTML5 is already suffering from bloat.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HTML , especially XHTML , can already do what the OP describes , but browsers do n't support all the bells and whistles needed for paper-like paged rendering .
CSS goes some way towards meeting the deficiencies , but the end user still retains sufficient control to ( perhaps unwittingly ) defeat almost any attempt to force pagination and placement .
It is tedious , but by no means impossible , to write documents of considerable complexity in HTML , as I pointed out long ago [ wiley.com ] , but page support requires browser cooperation.The only reliable answer at the moment is to provide multiple formats generated from a single source .
An XML master ( DocBook , TEI , whatever ) can be used with XSLT to generate LaTeX source code for making a PDF , and the pagination data can be re-used in a subsequent XSLT script to generate paged HTML .
The problem is the XML and LaTeX editors , which are unsuited for writing unless you learn about XML or LaTeX markup , and even the relatively smart ones do n't implement a lot of the features needed for complex structured writing ( come to Balisage [ balisage.net ] to find out why ) .LyX and similar editors ( Scientific Word , Textures ) provide synchronous typographic interfaces to LaTeX , and TeX4ht provides excellent conversion to web pages and other formats .
Even Word and OpenOffice , when used with named styles ( with utter rigour ) can be converted reliably to HTML , LaTeX and other outputs.The last thing on earth we need is to increase the size of the HTML tagset : HTML5 is already suffering from bloat .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HTML, especially XHTML, can already do what the OP describes, but browsers don't support all the bells and whistles needed for paper-like paged rendering.
CSS goes some way towards meeting the deficiencies, but the end user still retains sufficient control to (perhaps unwittingly) defeat almost any attempt to force pagination and placement.
It is tedious, but by no means impossible, to write documents of considerable complexity in HTML, as I pointed out long ago [wiley.com], but page support requires browser cooperation.The only reliable answer at the moment is to provide multiple formats generated from a single source.
An XML master (DocBook, TEI, whatever) can be used with XSLT to generate LaTeX source code for making a PDF, and the pagination data can be re-used in a subsequent XSLT script to generate paged HTML.
The problem is the XML and LaTeX editors, which are unsuited for writing unless you learn about XML or LaTeX markup, and even the relatively smart ones don't implement a lot of the features needed for complex structured writing (come to Balisage [balisage.net] to find out why).LyX and similar editors (Scientific Word, Textures) provide synchronous typographic interfaces to LaTeX, and TeX4ht provides excellent conversion to web pages and other formats.
Even Word and OpenOffice, when used with named styles (with utter rigour) can be converted reliably to HTML, LaTeX and other outputs.The last thing on earth we need is to increase the size of the HTML tagset: HTML5 is already suffering from bloat.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568229</id>
	<title>Editors should be ashamed.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246554660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>As mentioned by everyone else in this thread, LaTeX is exactly what you're looking for. HTML is absolutely not, and should never be made into, a page description language.</p><p>The editor of this Slashdot summary should be ashamed for not being familiar with LaTeX, one of the greatest open source projects.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>As mentioned by everyone else in this thread , LaTeX is exactly what you 're looking for .
HTML is absolutely not , and should never be made into , a page description language.The editor of this Slashdot summary should be ashamed for not being familiar with LaTeX , one of the greatest open source projects .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>As mentioned by everyone else in this thread, LaTeX is exactly what you're looking for.
HTML is absolutely not, and should never be made into, a page description language.The editor of this Slashdot summary should be ashamed for not being familiar with LaTeX, one of the greatest open source projects.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570533</id>
	<title>Re:Have you looked at PrinceXML?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246628580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Prince is what the poster is looking for, but Zaffle's comment below says why it is unsuited for traditional academic work.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Prince is what the poster is looking for , but Zaffle 's comment below says why it is unsuited for traditional academic work .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Prince is what the poster is looking for, but Zaffle's comment below says why it is unsuited for traditional academic work.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567697</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572403</id>
	<title>Been done DocBook or DITA</title>
	<author>\_32nHz</author>
	<datestamp>1246640280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>If you want your structure and presentation intertwined then use <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">ODF</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>If you want them separated:</p><p>For structure use the book inspired <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DocBook" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">DocBook</a> [wikipedia.org], or the journal inspired (and generally more flexible) <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darwin\_Information\_Typing\_Architecture" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">DITA</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>To format either of these for presentation (either on screen or in print) you can either use an adaptive layout with HTML+CSS or a predetermined layout with <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XSL-FO" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">XSL:FO</a> [wikipedia.org].</p><p>Can't think of any way of avoiding CSS as all three solutions use it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>If you want your structure and presentation intertwined then use ODF [ wikipedia.org ] .If you want them separated : For structure use the book inspired DocBook [ wikipedia.org ] , or the journal inspired ( and generally more flexible ) DITA [ wikipedia.org ] .To format either of these for presentation ( either on screen or in print ) you can either use an adaptive layout with HTML + CSS or a predetermined layout with XSL : FO [ wikipedia.org ] .Ca n't think of any way of avoiding CSS as all three solutions use it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>If you want your structure and presentation intertwined then use ODF [wikipedia.org].If you want them separated:For structure use the book inspired DocBook [wikipedia.org], or the journal inspired (and generally more flexible) DITA [wikipedia.org].To format either of these for presentation (either on screen or in print) you can either use an adaptive layout with HTML+CSS or a predetermined layout with XSL:FO [wikipedia.org].Can't think of any way of avoiding CSS as all three solutions use it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568327</id>
	<title>You're on the right track, for the wrong reason.</title>
	<author>mellon</author>
	<datestamp>1246555620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The ability to cite an HTML document is something that would indeed be useful.   The ability to hard code page numbers into an HTML document isn't.   The reason why academia and the press have been so resistant to HTML, historically, is that you don't get any control over page layout.   Which means that you can't refer to things by page number.</p><p>The solution isn't to fix HTML so that you can number pages.   It is to fix the bibliographic references to not use page numbers.   Generally speaking, it's not hard to number documents by section, and you can make the numbering fine-grained enough for bibliographic references.   Then refer to the chapter and section, rather than the page number in your bibliography, and you're done.   No need to "fix" HTML.</p><p>It might make sense to ID paragraphs in HTML, so that you could simply refer to the paragraph ID in your bibliography.   If this were simply document metadata, and didn't have anything to do with layout, it would work pretty well.   As a bonus, you wouldn't need to renumber, because the ID would just be an arbitrary cookie, and wouldn't need to make sense to a human.</p><p>Of course, with hypertext, there's really no need for a bibliography anyway.   Just link to the text you're referencing...   But I realize that that's impractical in academia at the moment.   I'm just saying...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The ability to cite an HTML document is something that would indeed be useful .
The ability to hard code page numbers into an HTML document is n't .
The reason why academia and the press have been so resistant to HTML , historically , is that you do n't get any control over page layout .
Which means that you ca n't refer to things by page number.The solution is n't to fix HTML so that you can number pages .
It is to fix the bibliographic references to not use page numbers .
Generally speaking , it 's not hard to number documents by section , and you can make the numbering fine-grained enough for bibliographic references .
Then refer to the chapter and section , rather than the page number in your bibliography , and you 're done .
No need to " fix " HTML.It might make sense to ID paragraphs in HTML , so that you could simply refer to the paragraph ID in your bibliography .
If this were simply document metadata , and did n't have anything to do with layout , it would work pretty well .
As a bonus , you would n't need to renumber , because the ID would just be an arbitrary cookie , and would n't need to make sense to a human.Of course , with hypertext , there 's really no need for a bibliography anyway .
Just link to the text you 're referencing... But I realize that that 's impractical in academia at the moment .
I 'm just saying.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The ability to cite an HTML document is something that would indeed be useful.
The ability to hard code page numbers into an HTML document isn't.
The reason why academia and the press have been so resistant to HTML, historically, is that you don't get any control over page layout.
Which means that you can't refer to things by page number.The solution isn't to fix HTML so that you can number pages.
It is to fix the bibliographic references to not use page numbers.
Generally speaking, it's not hard to number documents by section, and you can make the numbering fine-grained enough for bibliographic references.
Then refer to the chapter and section, rather than the page number in your bibliography, and you're done.
No need to "fix" HTML.It might make sense to ID paragraphs in HTML, so that you could simply refer to the paragraph ID in your bibliography.
If this were simply document metadata, and didn't have anything to do with layout, it would work pretty well.
As a bonus, you wouldn't need to renumber, because the ID would just be an arbitrary cookie, and wouldn't need to make sense to a human.Of course, with hypertext, there's really no need for a bibliography anyway.
Just link to the text you're referencing...   But I realize that that's impractical in academia at the moment.
I'm just saying...</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569543</id>
	<title>Opera CTO did it</title>
	<author>edelholz</author>
	<datestamp>1246615740000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The Opera CTO H&#229;kon Wium Lie had a talk at our university and I think just to prove a point, he wrote one of his books in HTML. Go look into that.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The Opera CTO H   kon Wium Lie had a talk at our university and I think just to prove a point , he wrote one of his books in HTML .
Go look into that .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The Opera CTO Håkon Wium Lie had a talk at our university and I think just to prove a point, he wrote one of his books in HTML.
Go look into that.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569493</id>
	<title>embedding images/graphs</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246615380000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>one problem with html is that images are kept as separate files. you would also need to have them embedded in the file i guess.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>one problem with html is that images are kept as separate files .
you would also need to have them embedded in the file i guess .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>one problem with html is that images are kept as separate files.
you would also need to have them embedded in the file i guess.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246550940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Latex is really the solution.  There is no reason to reinvent the wheel.  In fact, reinventing the wheel might cause problems when submitting papers.  From what I have seen, many academic journals prefer<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.tex and<nobr> <wbr></nobr>.eps files. I can't imagine what they would do with HTML.
<p>
The nice thing about LaTex is that, like HTML, it is a pure markup language, but it is a markup language that understands typesetting so one tend to get a good page layout no matter what.  OTOH, HTML merely identifies blocks of text as various generic types, and really does not have a context for the types.  The render engine is free visualize, make a sound, or do whatever it wishes to represent the blocks.  CSS is what imposes a consistent visual framework, so what one needs to duplicate LaTex is in fact CSS.
</p><p>
Use LaTex.  Except for the often limited fonts, it is vastly superior to an word processor, because a word processor is not the write tool to create real documents.  We have know that for many years.  That is why people bought pagemaker.  And I think the lack of fonts forces people to create compelling content.  LaTex is free, there are many good books,and if you do have a hankering to code, you can always play with Tex.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Latex is really the solution .
There is no reason to reinvent the wheel .
In fact , reinventing the wheel might cause problems when submitting papers .
From what I have seen , many academic journals prefer .tex and .eps files .
I ca n't imagine what they would do with HTML .
The nice thing about LaTex is that , like HTML , it is a pure markup language , but it is a markup language that understands typesetting so one tend to get a good page layout no matter what .
OTOH , HTML merely identifies blocks of text as various generic types , and really does not have a context for the types .
The render engine is free visualize , make a sound , or do whatever it wishes to represent the blocks .
CSS is what imposes a consistent visual framework , so what one needs to duplicate LaTex is in fact CSS .
Use LaTex .
Except for the often limited fonts , it is vastly superior to an word processor , because a word processor is not the write tool to create real documents .
We have know that for many years .
That is why people bought pagemaker .
And I think the lack of fonts forces people to create compelling content .
LaTex is free , there are many good books,and if you do have a hankering to code , you can always play with Tex .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Latex is really the solution.
There is no reason to reinvent the wheel.
In fact, reinventing the wheel might cause problems when submitting papers.
From what I have seen, many academic journals prefer .tex and .eps files.
I can't imagine what they would do with HTML.
The nice thing about LaTex is that, like HTML, it is a pure markup language, but it is a markup language that understands typesetting so one tend to get a good page layout no matter what.
OTOH, HTML merely identifies blocks of text as various generic types, and really does not have a context for the types.
The render engine is free visualize, make a sound, or do whatever it wishes to represent the blocks.
CSS is what imposes a consistent visual framework, so what one needs to duplicate LaTex is in fact CSS.
Use LaTex.
Except for the often limited fonts, it is vastly superior to an word processor, because a word processor is not the write tool to create real documents.
We have know that for many years.
That is why people bought pagemaker.
And I think the lack of fonts forces people to create compelling content.
LaTex is free, there are many good books,and if you do have a hankering to code, you can always play with Tex.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569165</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>Peter Winnberg</author>
	<datestamp>1246653780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Like you point out XeTeX has advantages. But many that are picky about typography will not use it because it is unable to use the microtype package ( that needs pdfTeX ).</htmltext>
<tokenext>Like you point out XeTeX has advantages .
But many that are picky about typography will not use it because it is unable to use the microtype package ( that needs pdfTeX ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Like you point out XeTeX has advantages.
But many that are picky about typography will not use it because it is unable to use the microtype package ( that needs pdfTeX ).</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568159</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568107</id>
	<title>Re:LaTeX</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1246553460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Another option is to use ReST (Restructured Text) which can be converted both to nice TeX and nice HTML.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Another option is to use ReST ( Restructured Text ) which can be converted both to nice TeX and nice HTML .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Another option is to use ReST (Restructured Text) which can be converted both to nice TeX and nice HTML.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567923</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568457</id>
	<title>Save as HTML</title>
	<author>InsertCleverUsername</author>
	<datestamp>1246557300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Some versions of Microsoft Word have a really cool feature called "Save as HTML".  Saves simple one-page documents as fantastically redundant HTML in less than a terabyte --and you might even get a cute little paperclip to help you through the process!</p><p>HTH.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Some versions of Microsoft Word have a really cool feature called " Save as HTML " .
Saves simple one-page documents as fantastically redundant HTML in less than a terabyte --and you might even get a cute little paperclip to help you through the process ! HTH .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Some versions of Microsoft Word have a really cool feature called "Save as HTML".
Saves simple one-page documents as fantastically redundant HTML in less than a terabyte --and you might even get a cute little paperclip to help you through the process!HTH.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_31</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568965
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_27</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572663
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_30</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568435
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568431
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_32</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572673
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570245
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567923
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568107
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567923
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572729
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_24</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568661
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28576111
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571211
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567959
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569899
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568313
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568679
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_22</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567837
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569123
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568189
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28573511
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570581
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_28</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572017
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569509
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_35</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568327
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571563
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_34</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570737
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_25</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570533
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570041
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_26</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568871
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_33</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571349
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569165
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_23</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567697
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568855
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567755
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567885
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567951
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569213
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_29</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567923
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569455
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567721
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570631
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568159
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28574319
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568973
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570139
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_09_07_02_236258_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569169
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567837
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569123
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568163
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570245
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570041
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568871
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572017
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568973
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568435
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28573511
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568457
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568327
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572663
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571563
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567721
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570631
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568381
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567959
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569899
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567885
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568965
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571211
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567951
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568189
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569213
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569611
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568355
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567823
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567697
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568855
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568679
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568313
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570533
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567623
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567755
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567809
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568159
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28571349
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28574319
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569165
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572673
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28576111
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568661
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567923
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569455
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28572729
---http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568107
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569509
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567679
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570737
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570581
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28569169
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568431
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28570139
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568747
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568233
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567841
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28568845
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567771
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567787
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation09_07_02_236258.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment09_07_02_236258.28567729
</commentlist>
</conversation>
