Dynamic font subsetting using a file size threshold for an electronic document

Information

  • Patent Grant
  • 10572574
  • Patent Number
    10,572,574
  • Date Filed
    Monday, December 23, 2013
    10 years ago
  • Date Issued
    Tuesday, February 25, 2020
    4 years ago
Abstract
A computer-implemented method includes analyzing content of a received electronic document in an autonomous manner to identify each unique character of one or more fonts included in the content of the electronic document. The method also includes initiating a request for a subset of one or more of the fonts included in the content of the electronic document, wherein the request includes each identified unique character of the respective one or more fonts.
Description
BACKGROUND

This description relates to initiating the production and delivery of font subsets.


In the ever-expanding connectivity provided by computer networks such as the Internet, various types of content such as text, graphics, audio, video, etc. may be exchanged between a few computing devices or broadcast to a multitude. Due to such connectivity, users located throughout various regions of the globe may access content providers who need the flexibility of providing content to users of different nationalities and cultures. For example, content provided to North American users may not be discernable to Asian users. As such, providers may tailor content for users in particular geographical regions or provide adjustable content to different users.


SUMMARY

The systems and techniques described here relate to producing and delivering font subsets.


In one aspect, a computer-implemented method includes analyzing content of a received electronic document in an autonomous manner to identify each unique character of one or more fonts included in the content of the electronic document. The method also includes initiating a request for a subset of one or more of the fonts included in the content of the electronic document, wherein the request includes each identified unique character of the respective one or more fonts.


Implementations may include any or all of the following features. Analyzing the content of the electronic document may include identifying a source of a font or the absence of a source included of a font in the one or more fonts. Analyzing content of a received electronic document in an autonomous manner may be initiated by executing an agent. Analyzing content of the received electronic document may include parsing the content of the electronic document to identify the characters represented in the document. Analyzing content of the received electronic document may include filtering the identified characters represented in the electronic document to identify each unique character for each of the one or more fonts included in the content of the electronic document. Initiating a request for a subset for one or more of the fonts may include adding the identified characters to a request. A response to the request may include all characters of one or more of the fonts. Analyzing the content of the electronic document may be performed independent of platform.


In another aspect a system includes a font server for providing to a computing device, upon request, an agent for analyzing content of an electronic document received by the computing device. The analysis performed by the agent identifies each unique character of one or more fonts included in the content of the electronic document. The font server is configured to produce, upon request from the computing device, a subset for one or more of the fonts in which each font subset includes each identified unique character of the respective font. The font server is further configured to initiate sending each font subset to the computing device.


Implementations may include any or all of the following features. Analyzing the content of the received electronic document, the agent may identify a source of a font or the absence of a source of a font included in the one or more fonts. The computing device may execute the agent received from the font server to analyze the content of the received electronic document. The agent may parse the content of the electronic document to identify the characters represented in the document. The agent may filter the identified characters represented in the document to identify each unique character for each of the one or more fonts included in the content of the electronic document. The agent may initiate production of the request for the font server. The agent may be configured to operate independent of the computing device type. The font server may be configured to determine the portion of font characters to include in the font subset, and the portion of the font characters to include in the font subset may include all characters of the font. The font server may associate the produced font subset to the received electronic document.


In another aspect a computing device includes a memory configured to store instructions and a processor configured to execute the instructions to perform a method. The method includes analyzing content of a received electronic document in an autonomous manner to identify each unique character of one or more fonts included in the content of the electronic document. The method also includes initiating a request for a subset of one or more of the fonts included in the content of the electronic document. The request includes each identified unique character of the respective one or more fonts.


Implementations may include any or all of the following features. Analyzing the content of the electronic document may include identifying a source of a font or the absence of a source of a font included in the one or more fonts. Analyzing content of a received electronic document in an autonomous manner may be initiated by executing an agent. Analyzing content of the received electronic document may include parsing the content of the electronic document to identify the characters represented in the document. Analyzing content of the received electronic document may include filtering the identified characters represented in the electronic document to identify each unique character for each of the one or more fonts included in the content of the electronic document. Initiating a request for a subset of one or more of the fonts includes adding the identified characters to a request.


In another aspect, one or more computer readable media storing instructions that are executable by a processing device, and upon such execution cause the processing device to perform operations that include analyzing content of a received electronic document in an autonomous manner to identify each unique character of one or more fonts included in the content of the electronic document. The operations also include initiating a request for a subset of one or more of the fonts included in the content of the electronic document. The request includes each identified unique character of the respective one or more fonts.


Implementations may include any or all of the following features. Analyzing the content of the electronic document may include identifying a source of a font or the absence of a source of a font included in the one or more fonts. Analyzing content of a received electronic document in an autonomous manner may be initiated by executing an agent.


These and other aspects and features and various combinations of them may be expressed as methods, apparatus, systems, means for performing functions, program products, and in other ways.


Other features and advantages will be apparent from the description and the claims.





DESCRIPTION OF DRAWINGS


FIG. 1 illustrates exemplary content that may be transferred through a computer network.



FIG. 2 is a block diagram an Internet based computer network.



FIG. 3 illustrates requesting and delivering a software agent and a font subset from a front provider.



FIG. 4 is an exemplary file for producing a webpage.



FIGS. 5, 6 and 7 illustrate examples of code instructions.



FIG. 8 is an example flow chart of operations of a software agent.



FIG. 9 is a block diagram of computing devices and systems.





DETAILED DESCRIPTION

Referring to FIG. 1, an exemplary webpage 100 is illustrated that may be accessed through the Internet (or other type of computer network) by a user of a computing device (e.g., computer system, personal digital assistant (PDA), cellular telephone etc.). For example, by providing an appropriate uniform resource locator (URL) to a web browser, the webpage may be accessed, packaged and sent from a corresponding content provider to the user's computing device for display. In the illustrated example, the content of the web page 100 is a birthday party invitation that includes text and graphics and may be accessed from a particular URL (i.e., www.invite.com). To provide an eye-catching invitation, multiple fonts are used that provide different typefaces, each of which can be considered as providing stylistic characters or glyphs. A “character” can be considered as a member of a set of shapes used for the organization, control and representation of information, and, a “glyph” can be considered as a specific instance of a character.


Once accessed, a content provider may use one or more techniques to provide the content of the webpage 100 to the user's computing device. For example, the webpage 100 may be represented in one or more files (e.g., file 102) that use a markup language such as hypertext markup language (HTML) so that the webpage 100 conforms to the browser executed by the computing device. Standards such as the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) standards for HTML, CSS, XML and other standards may be implemented by the browser so the webpage 100 can be properly rendered on various types of platforms capable of displaying electronic content (e.g. personal computers, wireless telephones, personal digital assistants, handheld computers, set-top boxes and Internet appliances, etc.).


Along with providing graphics (e.g., a graphic of a birthday cake in this instance), the one or more HTML files may reference one or more fonts used to render text on the webpage. For illustration, five different fonts are used in the webpage 100 to provide information associated with the invitation (e.g., time, date, location, event description, and menu). As such, the HTML file 102 calls out each font such that the recipient computing device is aware which font corresponds to each portion of textual information (e.g., present the date in a Times New Roman font). Upon receiving and executing the instructions included in the HTML file 102, the recipient computer device may locally retrieve the fonts needed to present the text. However, a considerable amount of computing devices are unable to locally store all the characters of each font that could be needed to render the webpage. Limited resources (e.g., memory) and the constant creation of new font types can limit each type of computing device from being ready to display text in any and all fonts. Fonts associated with different languages amplifies the issue that many computing devices are unable to provide all font types. Languages such as Chinese, Japanese, Korean, etc. use alphabets of characters that may number in the tens of thousands (e.g., over 10,000 characters) and call for 1 MB to 20 MB of memory to store the characters of a single language. Such memory needs are impractical, specially for computing devices with less robust onboard memory (e.g., cellular telephones). Further, storing complete character sets for even a few fonts may be inefficient if only a few characters are need from a set (to present a particular webpage). Referring to the illustrated example, a relatively small number of Times New Roman font characters are needed to present the event date (e.g., “A”, “p”, “r”, “i”, “1”, “2”, “0”, “t” and “h”) and storing the complete font character set may be considered an unwise use of device memory, certainly if a complete character set is stored for each possible user language (e.g., English, Chinese, Japanese, etc.).


To conserve the use of local memory, some conventional techniques provide complete font sets with the received webpage content (e.g., an HTML file) or initiate the retrieval of the complete character sets of needed fonts upon receipt of the file associated with the webpage. However, such techniques may still cause computing device memory to be filled with collections of font characters when only a few characters are actually being used by the webpage. For example, as illustrated in the figure, to present the webpage 100 on a computing device, complete font character sets 104, 106, 108, 110, 112 are provided along with the HTML file 102. As such, each possible character of the five fonts used by the webpage 100 is provided to the computing device, thereby consuming a considerable amount of memory of the computing device.


The time needed for transferring fonts along with bandwidth consumption also provides a concern. For example, transferring complete character sets of fonts associated with languages such as Chinese, Japanese and Korean may need considerable bandwidth and transfer time.


One or more techniques may be used to reduce the file transfer time, bandwidth consumption and needed memory space for preparing to present webpages such as webpage 100. For example, rather than providing complete character sets for each font, font subsets may be provided that include only the characters that appear in the webpage. As such, file transfer time and bandwidth needs are reduced and device memory is conserved while an appropriate set of font characters is provided for webpage presentation. Referring to the illustrated example, each of the font character sets 104-112 may be replaced with significantly smaller font subsets that can be provided with the HTML file 102 or relatively soon after receipt of the file. Similar to reducing transfer time and bandwidth needs based on font subsets for the stylistic appearance of characters, reductions may also be achieved for providing font subsets associated with different languages. For example, if a webpage contains only three hundred Chinese characters, it may be more efficient to provide a font subset that is restricted to only include the three hundred characters, which may reduce the size of the transferred font data from approximately 10 MB to 50 KB. In some situations while subsets may be produced for some font character sets (e.g., the Chinese language character set), other font character sets may be sent as complete sets. For example, due to the relatively small number of characters included in a complete font set (e.g., the Latin language character set), creating and transferring a subset may not significantly reduce the bandwidth or time needed to transfer the entire character set. Along with reducing the size of font character sets provided to a computing device to present a webpage or other types of electronic document, one or more techniques may be implemented to efficiently provide such font subsets to computing devices. For example, along with presenting the webpage, the user's computing device may be used for identifying the appropriate font subsets and subsequently request the identified subsets.


Referring to FIG. 2, a computer network 200 includes a computer system 202 that a user may interact with (e.g., using a keyboard or pointing device such as a mouse) identify a target webpage to be presented with the computer system. For example, a web browser 204 or similar software application may be executed by the computer system 202 for the user to target one or more webpages. Upon being identified, operations of the web browser 204 may include requesting, via the Internet 206, content from one or more webpage sources 208a,b,c for the target webpage(s). As illustrated, in this particular example a webpage page is requested from webpage source 208a and a corresponding HTML file 210 is sent from the source through the Internet 206 to the computer system 202.


To identify the appropriate font subsets to present the webpage defined by the HTML file 210, the computer system 202 may use one or more techniques. For example, operations may be executed by the computer system 202 to scan the HTML file 210 to identify the individual font characters included in the webpage defined by the file. In one arrangement, the computer system 202 may execute a software agent 212 to identify the individual font characters and to send a request to initiate the production of font subsets (if appropriate) needed to present the webpage. Such agents can be considered as a software module that is executable in a substantially autonomous manner. For example, upon being provided to the computer system 202, a software agent may operate without considerable user interaction. By operating in a somewhat flexible manner, the software agent can adaptively identify font characters needed for webpage presentation. In this particular example, the software agent 212 scans the content of the HTML file 210 in a somewhat persistent manner for identifying the font characters. For example, the software agent may execute in a substantially continuous manner. In some arrangements the software agent is provided to the user computing device (e.g., computer system 202) very shortly after the delivery of the file or files (e.g., the HTML file 210). As such, electronic documents such as webpages, application pages, user interfaces, and the like may be perceived as being scanned nearly in real time as the documents are received.


The computer network 200 also includes a font provider 214 that determines to produce font subsets (when appropriate) based upon information provided by software agents (e.g., software agent 212) executed by user computing devices (e.g., computer system 202). Once produced, the subset or subsets (e.g., illustrated as font subset 216) are packaged and sent by the font provider 214 to the requesting computing device. Along with determining to produce one or more font subsets, the font provider 214 is also capable of determining if complete font character sets should be provided to the requesting computing device. For example, predefined rules may be used by the font provider 214 in determining whether a font subset should be sent. One such rule may indicate that font character sets associated particular languages (e.g., Chinese) should have subsets created due to the large size of the complete character set. Subset determinations may also be provided in a dynamic manner. For example, based upon achievable file transfer rates, a file size threshold (e.g., 2 MB) may be determined such that subsets are produced for character sets larger than the threshold. If a font character set size falls below the threshold, the entire character set may be sent as the file transfer rate may be considered within an efficient range. Such thresholds may be dynamically adjusted, for example, by monitoring the achievable transfer rates, the threshold may be changed. For example, as the level of achievable transfer rates decreases, the threshold for creating subsets for character sets may correspondingly be decreased (e.g., lowered from 2 MB to 1 MB). One or more factors may account for determining the transfer rates as being within an efficient range. For example, geographic location of the user computing device and the font provider may factor into whether a subset should be produced and sent in place of a complete character set. If both the font provider and the user computing device are located relatively nearby (e.g., both in the eastern United States), relatively high transfer rates may be achievable and the entire character set may be sent. For a situation in which the user computing device is remote from the font provider (e.g., one in the United States and the other in India), the font provider may determine to subset the font character set to be sent. Similar to location based determinations, time of day, season of year and other temporal factors may be used by the font provider to determine if subsets need to be produced for one or more font character sets identified for transmission.


In some arrangements, the font provider 214 may also provide the software agents to the computing devices for scanning received files (e.g., HTML file 210) for character identification. As such, the font provider 214 may operate independent of the webpage sources 208a,b,c. Once a request is received from a user computing device, the font provider 214 may provide appropriate agent software to the requesting device. Once the electronic document is scanned by the software agent, appropriate fonts and font subsets may be provided by the font provided 214 based upon a request initiated by the executed agent.


To provide the fonts and font subsets, the font provider 214 typically needs access to one or more libraries of fonts that may be stored local or remote to the font provider. As represented in the figure, a library of fonts 218 is shown being stored in a storage device 220 (e.g., one or more hard drives, CD-ROMs, etc.) on site. Being accessible by a server 222, the font library 218 may be used along with information provided from software agents to produce appropriate font subsets that can be provided along with complete font character sets (if determined appropriate by the font provider). Illustrated as being stored in a single storage device 220, the font provider 214 may use numerous storage techniques and devices to retain a collection of accessible sets of fonts (e.g., for different font styles, languages, etc.). The font provider 214 may also access fonts at separate locations for subset production. For example, upon identifying characters needed for a font subset, the server 222 may be used to collect needed characters from one or more sources external to the font provider 214 (e.g., via the Internet 206).


Along with producing font subsets and providing them (along with complete font sets, if appropriate) to requesting computing devices, the font provider 214 may provide other functionality. For example, fonts and font subsets associated with particular webpages may be tracked for future requests. In one scenario, one or more font subsets (e.g., font subset 216) may be created for presenting a particular webpage (on a computing device). The association between the font subsets and the webpage may be identified (e.g., by the server 222) and stored for later retrieval. As such, the subsets needed to present the webpage in the future (e.g., on another computing device) can be quickly identified and provided to the requesting computing device. In one arrangement, a font database 224 is stored at the font provider 214 (e.g., on the storage device 220) and includes records that represent the association between webpages and font subsets (and fonts). In some instances, the association is identified from information provided by font subset requests sent to the font provider 214 (e.g., from a software agent). The association between a webpage and appropriate font subsets may also be stored prior to the webpage being selected by a user (e.g., based on directions and information provided by a webpage source). Other types of architectures and networking techniques may also be implemented for providing software agents and font subsets (and fonts) to user computing devices for presentation of electronic documents such as webpages.


Referring to FIG. 3, a diagram 300 represents some operations for providing a software agent to a user's computing device along with appropriate font subsets (and fonts) needed to present a webpage of other type of electronic document. As illustrated in FIG. 2, upon a user identifying a webpage of interest with a web browser executed on a computing device (e.g., providing a URL to the web browser), one or more files (e.g., HTML files) may be provided to the user's computing device from a corresponding webpage source. As illustrated, such a file 302 may include content 304 (e.g., text, graphics, video, audio, etc.) for presenting to the user (via the web browser). The file 302 may also contain one or more instructions 306 for requesting that a software agent be provided to the user's computing device 202. Upon executing the instructions (labeled in the figure “Fetch agent instruction”), delivery of a request 308 may be initiated from the user computing device (e.g., the computer system 202) to the font provider 214 (e.g., server 222), as represented by graphical arrow 310. In response to the request 308, an agent (e.g., the agent 212) is sent from the server 222 of the font provider 214 to the user computing device (e.g., computer system 202), as represented by graphical arrow 312. In some instances the delivery of the agent may occur very soon after the file is received and any delay may go unnoticed by a user. In some arrangements, other information may be provided by the request 308. For example, the webpage of interest may be identified in the request (e.g., URL of the webpage provided) so that the font provider 214 may determine if a one or more font subsets (and possibly fonts) have been previously produced for the webpage.


Received at the user computing device, the requested agent 212 is executed to scan the content 304 of the HTML file 302 (as represented by a graphical arrow 314) to identify characters for each font represented in the content. The agent 212 may also provide the functionality to identify each unique character of each font present. As such, multiple instances of the same font character may only be noted once by the agent, thereby consolidating the characters needed to be requested from the font provider 214 (for each received electronic document). In some arrangements, the agent 212 notifies the font provider 214 of each character identified for each font present in the webpage. Upon being provided this information, the font provider identifies each uniquely occurring character for each font for possible inclusion in a font subset. To provide such scanning operations, one or more techniques may be implemented, for example, the agent may parse the content 304 to identify each character present for each font. One or more filters may then be used (by the agent 212 or the font provider 214) to identify each unique character for each font. For example, if the characters “a”, “B”, and “c” for font A are detected in the content 304 and characters “x”, “Y”, and “Z” for font B are detected, the agent may identify a subset for font A as containing “a”, “B” and “c” while the subset for font B may contain “x”, “Y” and “Z”. Once scanned, identified font characters 316 are used by the agent 212 to produce a font subset request 318. In general, the request 318 includes each character identified by the agent 212, however, some characters included in the content of the page content 304 may not be included in the request 318. For example, characters identified as possibly being locally stored at the user computing device may not be included in the request 318. As such, the agent 212 may exclude some characters included in the page content 304 from the subset request 318.


One or more techniques may be implemented to provide the font subset request 318 to the server 222 of the font provider 214, as represented by graphical arrow 320. For example, for an agent represented in JavaScript, a technique associated with a protocol such as the hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) may be used for transferring the request. By appending the identified unique characters to a query string of the URL of interest, a command (e.g., a GET command) can be used to provide the information to the server 222. Similarly, an agent that is provided as an application may provide the character information to the server 222 of the font provider 214 with a protocol such as HTTP. Once provided the request 318 for the font subset(s), the server 222 produces the one or more needed font subsets and complete font character sets (if appropriate) and replies to the user computing device. For example, as represented with graphical arrow 322, the font subset 216 (that may represent one or more font subsets and possibly one or more complete font character sets) is provided to the user computing device.


Referring to FIG. 4, instructions of an exemplary HTML file 400 are illustrated that include requesting an agent (such as the agent 212 shown in FIG. 2) and assigning fonts to particular characters. In this particular example, upon instruction 402 being executed (e.g., by the computer system 202), an agent is requested from a font provider (e.g., the font provider 214). Once received by the computer system 202, the agent is executed to analyze the contents of the HTML file 400. For example, the agent may step through each of the remaining lines of the HTML file 400 and identify each character and font used to present the webpage associated with the contents of the file. For example, by analyzing instruction 404, the agent may identify that characters “A”, “B”, “C” and “D” in frutiger font are needed for webpage production. In this particular arrangement, the individual characters (e.g., “A B C D”) are provided by the instruction 404 along with a URL for accessing the font. Similarly, the executed agent also identifies, in instruction 406, that characters “Z” and “W” need to be represented in frutiger font to produce the webpage. As such, when producing a font subset request (e.g., request 318 shown in FIG. 3), the agent identifies each of the unique characters (i.e., “A”, “B”, “C”, “D”, “Z” and “W”) and the corresponding font (i.e., frutiger) needed to produce the webpage. In some arrangements, while scanning the content of the file, the agent may come across characters that are not to be included in a font subset request. For example, the HTML file may include an instance in which locally stored fonts on the computer system (executing the file) are to be used for representing particular characters. As such, fonts do not need to be attained from sources external to the computer system. Instruction 408 of the exemplary HTML file 400 illustrates such an occurrence. In this instance, the characters “M”, “P” and “Q” are called out by the instruction 408 without a URL for a particular font. As such, fonts local to the computer system executing the file 400 may be used to present the characters “M”, “P” and “Q”. Since a font or font subset is not needed for these particular characters, the agent does not include these characters in the request 318. However, while these characters are stored locally for this particular font, one or more of these characters may be included in the request for another font based upon another instruction (not shown) in the file 400 that calls out “M”, “P” and/or “Q” as being needed in a font attained from a source external to the computer system.


Referring to FIG. 5, one or more techniques may be implemented to analyze the content of a file such as the HTML file 400 (illustrated in FIG. 4) to identify characters for font subsets. For a JavaScript based agent, a browser independent library (referred to as jQuery and which emphasizes interactions between JavaScript and HTML), may be used to analyze text content. To provide this functionality, a jQuery framework may be used to provide an agent for extracting unique characters from a string. The jQuery framework may also include an associative array (referred to as a JSON) for forming associations between the identified unique characters and a corresponding font. Stepping through the file in an iterative manner, the unique characters are identified and stored (e.g., cached) for further processing. The portion of code 500 presented in the figure can provide this functionality.


Referring to FIG. 6, upon identifying the unique characters, one or more techniques may be implemented to group the identified characters accordingly based upon font. For example, each unique character (e.g., “A”, “B”, “C”, “D”, “Z” and “W”) identified for a particular font (e.g., frutiger) is a member of a group for that font. Additionally, for fonts that have relatively few members (e.g., a font associated with the Latin language), a group of unique characters may not be formed. For such fonts that include relatively fewer members, the entire font set may be sent without consuming considerable computational resources such as transfer time and bandwidth. As such, the complete font set be provided (e.g., from the font provider) for producing characters of that font. The portion of code 600 presented in the figure can provide this functionality.


Referring to FIG. 7, once the identified unique characters for each font have been grouped (along with any identified fonts that have relatively small character sets), the agent provides this information to the font provider 214 (e.g., to the server 222 of the font provider). One or more techniques may be used to provide this information. For example, a command such as the HTTP GET command may be used to append identified characters and corresponding fonts to a URL query string. Upon receiving a request (provided by the HTTP GET command), the font provider 214 (e.g., the server 222 of the font provider) creates and sends one or more appropriate font subsets to the requesting computer system. Complete font sets may also be sent for identified fonts that include relatively few characters, based upon predefined rules associated with one or more factors (e.g., geographic location of user and/or font provider, temporal information, data transfer parameters such as achievable transfer rate, etc.). To provide the identified unique characters and corresponding fonts, a portion of code 700 is presented in the figure that can provide this functionality.


Referring to FIG. 8, a flowchart 800 represents operations of a software agent (e.g., the software agent 212 shown in FIG. 2). Operations of the agent 212 are typically executed by a single computing device (e.g., computer system 202), however, operations of the agent may be executed by multiple computing devices. Along with being executed at a single site (e.g., at one computer system), operation execution may be distributed among two or more locations.


Typically, the agent is requested by the user computing device (e.g., from code included in a file such as an HTML file) and provided from an external source such as the font provider 214. Upon being received and executed by the user computing device, operations may include analyzing 802 the content of an electronic document such as the HTML file that included the instructions to request the software agent. By using a software agent, the content of the electronic document is analyzed in a relatively autonomous and persistent manner. One or more techniques may be implemented to analyze the electronic documents, for example, the agent may step through the document and associate each included character with a corresponding font. Operations may also include identifying 804 each unique character that is associated with a font. For example, while a document may include many instances of the character “a” for a particular font (e.g., Times New Roman), the agent may filter the many instances down to a single instance such that the character “a” is only requested once for the Times New Roman font. Character identification may also include identifying fonts that have relatively small character sets. As such, entire character sets may be requested if one or more of the characters (included in these fonts) are used in the electronic document. Operations may also include requesting 806 appropriate subsets for each font represented in the electronic document. The requested subsets typically include the identified unique characters for each corresponding font. However, for instances in which the font includes relatively few characters, the requested subset may include the entire character set for such a font.



FIG. 9 is a block diagram of computing systems 900 that may be used and implemented to perform operations associated with the agent 212. The computing systems may also be used by the font provider 214 to execute operations. Computing device 900 is intended to represent various forms of digital computers, such as laptops, desktops, workstations, personal digital assistants, servers, blade servers, mainframes, and other appropriate computers.


Computing device 900 includes a processor 902, memory 904, a storage device 906, a high-speed interface 908 connecting to memory 904 and high-speed expansion ports 910, and a low speed interface 912 connecting to low speed bus 914 and storage device 906. Each of the components 902, 904, 906, 908, 910, and 912, are interconnected using various busses, and can be mounted on a common motherboard or in other manners as appropriate. The processor 902 can process instructions for execution within the computing device 900, including instructions stored in the memory 904 or on the storage device 906 to display graphical information for a GUI on an external input/output device, such as display 916 coupled to high speed interface 908. In other implementations, multiple processors and/or multiple buses can be used, as appropriate, along with multiple memories and types of memory. Also, multiple computing devices 900 can be connected, with each device providing portions of the necessary operations (e.g., as a server bank, a group of blade servers, or a multi-processor system).


The memory 904 stores information within the computing device 900. In one implementation, the memory 904 is a computer-readable medium. In one implementation, the memory 904 is a volatile memory unit or units. In another implementation, the memory 904 is a non-volatile memory unit or units.


The storage device 906 is capable of providing mass storage for the computing device 900. In one implementation, the storage device 906 is a computer-readable medium. In various different implementations, the storage device 906 can be a floppy disk device, a hard disk device, an optical disk device, or a tape device, a flash memory or other similar solid state memory device, or an array of devices, including devices in a storage area network or other configurations. In one implementation, a computer program product is tangibly embodied in an information carrier. The computer program product contains instructions that, when executed, perform one or more methods, such as those described above. The information carrier is a computer- or machine-readable medium, such as the memory 904, the storage device 906, memory on processor 902, or the like.


The high speed controller 908 manages bandwidth-intensive operations for the computing device 900, while the low speed controller 912 manages lower bandwidth-intensive operations. Such allocation of duties is exemplary only. In one implementation, the high-speed controller 908 is coupled to memory 907, display 916 (e.g., through a graphics processor or accelerator), and to high-speed expansion ports 910, which can accept various expansion cards (not shown). In the implementation, low-speed controller 912 is coupled to storage device 906 and low-speed expansion port 914. The low-speed expansion port, which can include various communication ports (e.g., USB, Bluetooth, Ethernet, wireless Ethernet) can be coupled to one or more input/output devices, such as a keyboard, a pointing device, a scanner, or a networking device such as a switch or router, e.g., through a network adapter.


The computing device 900 can be implemented in a number of different forms, as shown in the figure. For example, it can be implemented as a standard server 920, or multiple times in a group of such servers. It can also be implemented as part of a rack server system 924. In addition, it can be implemented in a personal computer such as a laptop computer 922. Alternatively, components from computing device 900 can be combined with other components in a mobile device (not shown).


Embodiments of the subject matter and the functional operations described in this specification can be implemented in digital electronic circuitry, or in computer software, firmware, or hardware, including the structures disclosed in this specification and their structural equivalents, or in combinations of one or more of them. Embodiments of the subject matter described in this specification can be implemented as one or more computer program products, i.e., one or more modules of computer program instructions encoded on a computer-readable medium for execution by, or to control the operation of, data processing apparatus. The computer-readable medium can be a machine-readable storage device, a machine-readable storage substrate, a memory device, a composition of matter effecting a machine-readable propagated signal, or a combination of one or more of them. The term “data processing apparatus” encompasses all apparatus, devices, and machines for processing data, including by way of example a programmable processor, a computer, or multiple processors or computers. The apparatus can include, in addition to hardware, code that creates an execution environment for the computer program in question, e.g., code that constitutes processor firmware, a protocol stack, a database management system, an operating system, or a combination of one or more of them.


A computer program (also known as a program, software, software application, script, or code) can be written in any form of programming language, including compiled or interpreted languages, and it can be deployed in any form, including as a stand-alone program or as a module, component, subroutine, or other unit suitable for use in a computing environment. A computer program does not necessarily correspond to a file in a file system. A program can be stored in a portion of a file that holds other programs or data (e.g., one or more scripts stored in a markup language document), in a single file dedicated to the program in question, or in multiple coordinated files (e.g., files that store one or more modules, sub-programs, or portions of code). A computer program can be deployed to be executed on one computer or on multiple computers that are located at one site or distributed across multiple sites and interconnected by a communication network.


The processes and logic flows described in this specification can be performed by one or more programmable processors executing one or more computer programs to perform functions by operating on input data and generating output. The processes and logic flows can also be performed by, and apparatus can also be implemented as, special purpose logic circuitry, e.g., an FPGA (field programmable gate array) or an ASIC (application-specific integrated circuit).


Processors suitable for the execution of a computer program include, by way of example, both general and special purpose microprocessors, and any one or more processors of any kind of digital computer. Generally, a processor will receive instructions and data from a read-only memory or a random access memory or both. The essential elements of a computer are a processor for performing instructions and one or more memory devices for storing instructions and data. Generally, a computer will also include, or be operatively coupled to receive data from or transfer data to, or both, one or more mass storage devices for storing data, e.g., magnetic, magneto-optical disks, or optical disks. However, a computer need not have such devices. Moreover, a computer can be embedded in another device, e.g., a mobile telephone, a personal digital assistant (PDA), a mobile audio player, a Global Positioning System (GPS) receiver, to name just a few. Computer-readable media suitable for storing computer program instructions and data include all forms of non-volatile memory, media and memory devices, including by way of example semiconductor memory devices, e.g., EPROM, EEPROM, and flash memory devices; magnetic disks, e.g., internal hard disks or removable disks; magneto-optical disks; and CD-ROM and DVD-ROM disks. The processor and the memory can be supplemented by, or incorporated in, special purpose logic circuitry.


Embodiments of the subject matter described in this specification can be implemented in a computing system that includes a back-end component, e.g., as a data server, or that includes a middleware component, e.g., an application server, or that includes a front-end component, e.g., a client computer having a graphical user interface or a Web browser through which a user can interact with an implementation of the subject matter described is this specification, or any combination of one or more such back-end, middleware, or front-end components. The components of the system can be interconnected by any form or medium of digital data communication, e.g., a communication network. Examples of communication networks include a local area network (“LAN”) and a wide area network (“WAN”), e.g., the Internet.


The computing system can include clients and servers. A client and server are generally remote from each other and typically interact through a communication network. The relationship of client and server arises by virtue of computer programs running on the respective computers and having a client-server relationship to each other.


While this specification contains many specifics, these should not be construed as limitations on the scope of the invention or of what may be claimed, but rather as descriptions of features specific to particular embodiments of the invention. Certain features that are described in this specification in the context of separate embodiments can also be implemented in combination in a single embodiment. Conversely, various features that are described in the context of a single embodiment can also be implemented in multiple embodiments separately or in any suitable subcombination. Moreover, although features may be described above as acting in certain combinations and even initially claimed as such, one or more features from a claimed combination can in some cases be excised from the combination, and the claimed combination may be directed to a subcombination or variation of a subcombination.


Similarly, while operations are depicted in the drawings in a particular order, this should not be understood as requiring that such operations be performed in the particular order shown or in sequential order, or that all illustrated operations be performed, to achieve desirable results. In certain circumstances, multitasking and parallel processing may be advantageous. Moreover, the separation of various system components in the embodiments described above should not be understood as requiring such separation in all embodiments, and it should be understood that the described program components and systems can generally be integrated together in a single software product or packaged into multiple software products.


Thus, particular embodiments of the invention have been described. Other embodiments are within the scope of the following claims. For example, the actions recited in the claims can be performed in a different order and still achieve desirable results.

Claims
  • 1. A computer-implemented method comprising: analyzing content of a received electronic document in an autonomous manner, by an agent of a computer, to identify each unique character of one or more fonts represented in the content of the electronic document, wherein analyzing includes parsing the content;initiating a request for a subset of one or more of the fonts represented in the content of the electronic document, wherein the request includes each identified unique character of the respective one or more fonts; andreceiving the subset of the one or more fonts or the subset of the one or more fonts and additional font glyphs, the additional font glyphs being determined external from the computer and based upon one or more conditions, at least one of the one or more conditions being based upon a file size threshold.
  • 2. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 in which analyzing the content of the electronic document includes identifying a source of a font represented in the one or more fonts.
  • 3. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 in which analyzing the content of the electronic document includes identifying the absence of a source of a font represented in the one or more fonts.
  • 4. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 in which analyzing content of the received electronic document includes parsing the content of the electronic document to identify the characters represented in the document.
  • 5. The computer-implemented method of claim 4 in which analyzing content of the received electronic document includes filtering the identified characters represented in the electronic document to identify each unique character for each of the one or more fonts represented in the content of the electronic document.
  • 6. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 in which initiating a request for a subset of one or more of the fonts includes adding the identified characters to a request.
  • 7. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 in which a response to the request includes all glyphs of one of the fonts.
  • 8. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 in which analyzing the content of the electronic document is performed independent of platform.
  • 9. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 in which the request includes data representing the electronic document.
  • 10. The computer-implemented method of claim 9 in which the data representing the electronic document in the request is used to determine if the subset of the one or more fonts or the subset of the one or more fonts and the additional font glyphs has been previously prepared.
  • 11. The computer-implemented method of claim 1 in which the one or more fonts or the subset of the one or more fonts and the additional font glyphs is identified from stored information that associates the electronic document and the one or more fonts or the subset of the one or more fonts and the additional font glyphs.
  • 12. A system comprising: a font server for providing to a computing device, upon request, an agent for analyzing content of an electronic document received by the computing device, wherein the analysis performed by the agent identifies each unique character of one or more fonts represented in the content of the electronic document, wherein the analysis includes parsing the content;wherein the font server is configured to produce, upon request from the computing device, a subset for each of the one or more of the fonts, each font subset includes each identified unique character of the respective font; andwherein the font server is further configured to initiate sending each font subset to the computing device, or, each font subset and additional font glyphs, the additional font glyphs being determined external from the computing device and based upon one or more conditions, at least one of the one or more conditions being based upon a file size threshold.
  • 13. The system of claim 12 in which by analyzing the content of the received electronic document, the agent identifies a source of a font represented in the one or more fonts.
  • 14. The system of claim 12 in which by analyzing the content of the received electronic document, the agent identifies the absence of a source of a font represented in the one or more fonts.
  • 15. The system of claim 12 in which the computing device executes the agent received from the font server to analyze the content of the received electronic document.
  • 16. The system of claim 12 in which the agent parses the content of the electronic document to identify the characters represented in the document.
  • 17. The system of claim 16 in which the agent filters the identified characters represented in the document to identify each unique character for each of the one or more fonts included in the content of the electronic document.
  • 18. The system of claim 12 in which the agent initiates production of the request for the font server.
  • 19. The system of claim 12 in which the agent is configured to operate independent of the computing device type.
  • 20. The system of claim 12 in which the font server is configured to determine the portion of font glyphs to include in the font subset.
  • 21. The system of claim 20, in which the portion of the font glyphs to include in the font subset includes all glyphs of the font.
  • 22. The system of claim 12, in which the font server associates the produced font subset to the received electronic document.
  • 23. A computing device comprising: a memory configured to store instructions; anda processor configured to execute the instructions to perform a method comprising: analyzing content of a received electronic document in an autonomous manner, by an agent, to identify each unique character of one or more fonts represented in the content of the electronic document, wherein analyzing includes parsing the content;initiating a request for a subset of one or more of the fonts represented in the content of the electronic document, wherein the request includes each identified unique character of the respective one or more fonts; andreceiving the subset of the one or more fonts or the subset of the one or more fonts and additional font glyphs, the additional font glyphs being determined external from the computing device and based upon one or more conditions, at least one of the one or more conditions being based upon a file size threshold.
  • 24. The computing device of claim 23, in which analyzing the content of the electronic document includes identifying a source of a font represented in the one or more fonts.
  • 25. The computing device of claim 23, in which analyzing the content of the electronic document includes identifying the absence of a source of a font represented in the one or more fonts.
  • 26. The computing device of claim 23, in which analyzing content of the received electronic document includes parsing the content of the electronic document to identify the characters represented in the document.
  • 27. The computing device of claim 26, in which analyzing content of the received electronic document includes filtering the identified characters represented in the electronic document to identify each unique character for each of the one or more fonts represented in the content of the electronic document.
  • 28. The computing device of claim 23, in which initiating a request for a subset of one or more of the fonts includes adding the identified characters to a request.
  • 29. One or more non-transitory computer readable media storing instructions that are executable by a processing device, and upon such execution cause the processing device to perform operations comprising: analyzing content of a received electronic document in an autonomous manner, by an agent of a computer to identify each unique character of one or more fonts represented in the content of the electronic document, wherein analyzing includes parsing the content;initiating a request for a subset of one or more of the fonts represented in the content of the electronic document, wherein the request includes each identified unique character of the respective one or more fonts; andreceiving the subset of the one or more fonts or the subset of the one or more fonts and additional font glyphs, the additional font glyphs being determined external from the computer and based upon one or more conditions, at least one of the one or more conditions being based upon a file size threshold.
  • 30. The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 29, in which analyzing the content of the electronic document includes identifying a source of a font represented in the one or more fonts.
  • 31. The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 29, in which analyzing the content of the electronic document includes identifying the absence of a source of a font represented in the one or more fonts.
  • 32. The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 29 in which analyzing content of the received electronic document includes parsing the content of the electronic document to identify the characters represented in the document.
  • 33. The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 32 in which analyzing content of the received electronic document includes filtering the identified characters represented in the electronic document to identify each unique character for each of the one or more fonts represented in the content of the electronic document.
  • 34. The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 29 in which initiating a request for a subset of one or more of the fonts includes adding the identified characters to a request.
  • 35. The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 29 in which a response to the request includes all glyphs of one of the fonts.
  • 36. The non-transitory computer readable media of claim 29 in which analyzing the content of the electronic document is performed independent of platform.
  • 37. A system comprising: a font server device for producing, upon a request from a computing device, one or more font subsets, wherein each font subset includes glyphs for each unique character of the respective font as identified from parsing content of an electronic document by an agent executed by the computing device; andwherein the font server is configured to initiate sending each font subset to the computing device, or, each font subset and additional font glyphs to the computing device, the additional font glyphs being determined by the font server device and based upon one or more conditions, at least one of the one or more conditions being based upon a file size threshold.
  • 38. The system of claim 37 in which the font server is configured to provide the agent to the computing device.
  • 39. The system of claim 37 in which the agent analyzes the content of the electronic document to identify a source of a font represented in the content of the electronic document.
  • 40. The system of claim 37 in which the agent analyzes the content of the received electronic document to identify the absence of a source of a font represented in the content of the electronic document.
  • 41. The system of claim 37 in which the agent parses the content of the electronic document to identify the characters represented in the document.
  • 42. The system of claim 41 in which the agent filters the identified characters represented in the electronic document to identify each unique character for each of the one or more fonts represented in the content of the electronic document.
  • 43. The system of claim 37 in which the agent initiates production of the request for the font server.
  • 44. The system of claim 37 in which the agent is configured to operate independent of the computing device type.
  • 45. The system of claim 37 in which the font server is configured to determine the portion of font glyphs to include in the font subset.
  • 46. The system of claim 45, in which the portion of the font glyphs to include in the font subset includes all glyphs of the font.
  • 47. The system of claim 37, in which the font server associates the produced font subset to the electronic document.
CLAIM OF PRIORITY

This application is a continuation application and claims priority under 35 U.S.C. § 120 to U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/769,839 filed on Apr. 29, 2010 (U.S. Pat. No. 8,615,709 to issue on Dec. 24, 2013), the entire contents of which are hereby incorporated by reference.

US Referenced Citations (295)
Number Name Date Kind
4244657 Wasylyk Jan 1981 A
4998210 Kadono Mar 1991 A
5263132 Parker et al. Nov 1993 A
5347266 Bauman et al. Sep 1994 A
5412771 Fenwick May 1995 A
5416898 Opstad et al. May 1995 A
5444829 Kawabata et al. Aug 1995 A
5453938 Gohara et al. Sep 1995 A
5526477 McConnell et al. Jun 1996 A
5528742 Moore et al. Jun 1996 A
5533174 Flowers et al. Jul 1996 A
5586242 McQueen, III Dec 1996 A
5606649 Tai Feb 1997 A
5619721 Maruko Apr 1997 A
5630028 DeMeo May 1997 A
5737599 Rowe et al. Apr 1998 A
5748975 Van De Vanter May 1998 A
5754187 Ristow May 1998 A
5757384 Ikeda May 1998 A
5761395 Miyazaki et al. Jun 1998 A
5781714 Collins et al. Jul 1998 A
5877776 Beaman et al. Mar 1999 A
5926189 Beaman et al. Jul 1999 A
5940581 Lipton Aug 1999 A
5995718 Hiraike Nov 1999 A
6012071 Krishna et al. Jan 2000 A
6016142 Chang Jan 2000 A
6031549 Hayes-Roth Feb 2000 A
6044205 Reed et al. Mar 2000 A
6065008 Simon May 2000 A
6073147 Chan et al. Jun 2000 A
6111654 Cartier Aug 2000 A
6141002 Kanungo et al. Oct 2000 A
6167441 Himmel Dec 2000 A
6249908 Stamm Jun 2001 B1
6252671 Peng et al. Jun 2001 B1
6282327 Betrisey Aug 2001 B1
6313920 Dresevic Nov 2001 B1
6320587 Funyu Nov 2001 B1
6323864 Kaul et al. Nov 2001 B1
6330577 Kim Dec 2001 B1
6343301 Halt et al. Jan 2002 B1
6426751 Patel Jul 2002 B1
6490051 Nguyen et al. Dec 2002 B1
6512531 Gartland Jan 2003 B1
6522330 Kobayashi Feb 2003 B2
6522347 Tsuji Feb 2003 B1
6583789 Carlson et al. Jun 2003 B1
6601009 Florschuetz Jul 2003 B2
6657625 Chik et al. Dec 2003 B1
6675358 Kido Jan 2004 B1
6678688 Unruh Jan 2004 B1
6687879 Teshima Feb 2004 B1
6704116 Abulhab Mar 2004 B1
6704648 Naik et al. Mar 2004 B1
6718519 Taieb Apr 2004 B1
6738526 Betrisey May 2004 B1
6754875 Paradies Jun 2004 B1
6760029 Phinney et al. Jul 2004 B1
6771267 Muller Aug 2004 B1
6810504 Cooper et al. Oct 2004 B2
6813747 Taieb Nov 2004 B1
6853980 Ying et al. Feb 2005 B1
6856317 Konsella et al. Feb 2005 B2
6882344 Hayes et al. Apr 2005 B1
6901427 Teshima May 2005 B2
6907444 Narasimhan et al. Jun 2005 B2
6952210 Renner et al. Oct 2005 B1
6993538 Gray Jan 2006 B2
7050079 Estrada et al. May 2006 B1
7064757 Opstad et al. Jun 2006 B1
7064758 Chik et al. Jun 2006 B2
7155672 Adler Dec 2006 B1
7184046 Hawkins Feb 2007 B1
7188313 Hughes et al. Mar 2007 B2
7228501 Brown et al. Jun 2007 B2
7231602 Truelove et al. Jun 2007 B1
7346845 Teshima et al. Mar 2008 B2
7373140 Matsumoto May 2008 B1
7477988 Dorum Jan 2009 B2
7492365 Corbin et al. Feb 2009 B2
7505040 Stamm et al. Mar 2009 B2
7539939 Schomer May 2009 B1
7552008 Newstrom et al. Jun 2009 B2
7580038 Chik et al. Aug 2009 B2
7583397 Smith Sep 2009 B2
7636885 Merz et al. Dec 2009 B2
7701458 Sahuc et al. Apr 2010 B2
7752222 Cierniak Jul 2010 B1
7768513 Klassen Aug 2010 B2
7836094 Ornstein et al. Nov 2010 B2
7882432 Nishikawa et al. Feb 2011 B2
7937658 Lunde May 2011 B1
7944447 Clegg et al. May 2011 B2
7958448 Fattic et al. Jun 2011 B2
7987244 Lewis et al. Jul 2011 B1
8098250 Clegg et al. Jan 2012 B2
8116791 Agiv Feb 2012 B2
8201088 Levantovsky et al. Jun 2012 B2
8201093 Tuli Jun 2012 B2
8306356 Bever Nov 2012 B1
8381115 Tranchant et al. Feb 2013 B2
8413051 Bacus et al. Apr 2013 B2
8464318 Hallak Jun 2013 B1
8601374 Parham Dec 2013 B2
8643652 Kaplan Feb 2014 B2
8644810 Boyle Feb 2014 B1
8643542 Kaplan Apr 2014 B2
8689101 Fux et al. Apr 2014 B2
8731905 Tsang May 2014 B1
9063682 Bradshaw Jun 2015 B1
9317777 Kaasila et al. Apr 2016 B2
9319444 Levantovsky Apr 2016 B2
9483445 Joshi et al. Nov 2016 B1
9569865 Kaasila et al. Feb 2017 B2
9626337 Kaasila et al. Apr 2017 B2
9691169 Kaasila et al. Jun 2017 B2
20010021937 Cicchitelli et al. Sep 2001 A1
20010052901 Kawabata et al. Dec 2001 A1
20020010725 Mo Jan 2002 A1
20020033824 Stamm Mar 2002 A1
20020052916 Kloba et al. May 2002 A1
20020057853 Usami May 2002 A1
20020059344 Britton May 2002 A1
20020087702 Mori Jul 2002 A1
20020093506 Hobson Jul 2002 A1
20020120721 Eilers et al. Aug 2002 A1
20020174186 Hashimoto et al. Nov 2002 A1
20020194261 Teshima Dec 2002 A1
20030014545 Broussard Jan 2003 A1
20030076350 Vu Apr 2003 A1
20030197698 Perry et al. Oct 2003 A1
20040025118 Renner Feb 2004 A1
20040088657 Brown et al. May 2004 A1
20040119714 Everett et al. Jun 2004 A1
20040177056 Davis et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040189643 Frisken et al. Sep 2004 A1
20040207627 Konsella et al. Oct 2004 A1
20040233198 Kubo Nov 2004 A1
20050015307 Simpson et al. Jan 2005 A1
20050033814 Ota Feb 2005 A1
20050094173 Engelman et al. May 2005 A1
20050111045 Imai May 2005 A1
20050128508 Greef et al. Jun 2005 A1
20050149942 Venkatraman Jul 2005 A1
20050190186 Klassen Sep 2005 A1
20050193336 Fux et al. Sep 2005 A1
20050200871 Miyata Sep 2005 A1
20050264570 Stamm Dec 2005 A1
20050270553 Kawara Dec 2005 A1
20050275656 Corbin Dec 2005 A1
20060010371 Shur et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060017731 Matskewich et al. Jan 2006 A1
20060061790 Miura Mar 2006 A1
20060072136 Hodder et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060072137 Nishikawa et al. Apr 2006 A1
20060072162 Nakamura Apr 2006 A1
20060103653 Chik et al. May 2006 A1
20060103654 Chik et al. May 2006 A1
20060168639 Gan Jul 2006 A1
20060241861 Takashima Oct 2006 A1
20060245727 Nakano et al. Nov 2006 A1
20060253395 Corbell Nov 2006 A1
20060267986 Bae Nov 2006 A1
20060269137 Evans Nov 2006 A1
20060285138 Merz et al. Dec 2006 A1
20070002016 Cho et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070006076 Cheng Jan 2007 A1
20070008309 Sahuc et al. Jan 2007 A1
20070024626 Kagle et al. Feb 2007 A1
20070050419 Weyl et al. Mar 2007 A1
20070055931 Zaima Mar 2007 A1
20070139412 Stamm Jun 2007 A1
20070139413 Stamm et al. Jun 2007 A1
20070159646 Adelberg Jul 2007 A1
20070172199 Kobayashi Jul 2007 A1
20070211062 Engleman et al. Sep 2007 A1
20070283047 Theis et al. Dec 2007 A1
20080028304 Levantovsky Jan 2008 A1
20080030502 Chapman Feb 2008 A1
20080115046 Yamaguchi May 2008 A1
20080154911 Cheng Jun 2008 A1
20080222734 Redlich et al. Sep 2008 A1
20080282186 Basavaraju Nov 2008 A1
20080303822 Taylor Dec 2008 A1
20080306916 Gonzalez et al. Dec 2008 A1
20090031220 Tranchant Jan 2009 A1
20090037492 Baitalmal et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090037523 Kolke et al. Feb 2009 A1
20090063964 Huang Mar 2009 A1
20090070128 McCauley et al. Mar 2009 A1
20090097049 Cho Apr 2009 A1
20090100074 Joung et al. Apr 2009 A1
20090119678 Shih May 2009 A1
20090158134 Wang Jun 2009 A1
20090183069 Duggan et al. Jul 2009 A1
20090275351 Jeung et al. Nov 2009 A1
20090287998 Kalra Nov 2009 A1
20090303241 Priyadarshi Dec 2009 A1
20090307585 Tranchant et al. Dec 2009 A1
20100014104 Soord Jan 2010 A1
20100066763 MacDougall Mar 2010 A1
20100088606 Kanno Apr 2010 A1
20100088694 Peng Apr 2010 A1
20100091024 Myadam Apr 2010 A1
20100115454 Tuli May 2010 A1
20100164984 Rane Jul 2010 A1
20100218086 Howell et al. Aug 2010 A1
20100231598 Hernandez et al. Sep 2010 A1
20100275161 DiCamillo Oct 2010 A1
20100321393 Levantovsky Dec 2010 A1
20110029103 Mann et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110032074 Novack et al. Feb 2011 A1
20110090229 Bacus et al. Apr 2011 A1
20110090230 Bacus Apr 2011 A1
20110093565 Bacus Apr 2011 A1
20110115797 Kaplan May 2011 A1
20110131153 Grim, III Jun 2011 A1
20110188761 Boutros et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110203000 Bacus et al. Aug 2011 A1
20110238495 Kang Sep 2011 A1
20110258535 Adler, III Oct 2011 A1
20110271180 Lee Nov 2011 A1
20110276872 Kataria Nov 2011 A1
20110289407 Naik Nov 2011 A1
20110310432 Waki Dec 2011 A1
20120001922 Escher Jan 2012 A1
20120016964 Veen et al. Jan 2012 A1
20120033874 Perronnin Feb 2012 A1
20120066590 Harris et al. Mar 2012 A1
20120072978 DeLuca Mar 2012 A1
20120092345 Joshi et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120102176 Lee et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120102391 Lee et al. Apr 2012 A1
20120127069 Santhiveeran et al. May 2012 A1
20120134590 Petrou May 2012 A1
20120215640 Ramer et al. Aug 2012 A1
20120288190 Tang Nov 2012 A1
20120306852 Taylor Dec 2012 A1
20120307263 Ichikawa et al. Dec 2012 A1
20120323694 Lita et al. Dec 2012 A1
20120323971 Pasupuleti Dec 2012 A1
20130033498 Linnerud Feb 2013 A1
20130067319 Olszewski et al. Mar 2013 A1
20130120396 Kaplan May 2013 A1
20130127872 Kaplan May 2013 A1
20130156302 Rodriguez Serrano et al. Jun 2013 A1
20130163027 Shustef Jun 2013 A1
20130179761 Cho Jul 2013 A1
20130185028 Sullivan Jul 2013 A1
20130215126 Roberts Aug 2013 A1
20130215133 Gould et al. Aug 2013 A1
20130321617 Lehmann Dec 2013 A1
20130326348 Ip et al. Dec 2013 A1
20140025756 Kamens Jan 2014 A1
20140047329 Levantovsky et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140052801 Zuo et al. Feb 2014 A1
20140089348 Vollmert Mar 2014 A1
20140136957 Kaasila et al. May 2014 A1
20140153012 Seguin Jun 2014 A1
20140176563 Kaasila et al. Jun 2014 A1
20140195903 Kaasila et al. Jul 2014 A1
20140282055 Engel et al. Sep 2014 A1
20140358802 Biswas Dec 2014 A1
20150020212 Demaree Jan 2015 A1
20150030238 Yang et al. Jan 2015 A1
20150062140 Levantovsky et al. Mar 2015 A1
20150074522 Harned, III et al. Mar 2015 A1
20150097842 Kaasila et al. Apr 2015 A1
20150100882 Severenuk Apr 2015 A1
20150154002 Weinstein et al. Jun 2015 A1
20150178476 Horton Jun 2015 A1
20150193386 Wurtz Jul 2015 A1
20150220494 Qin et al. Aug 2015 A1
20150278167 Arnold et al. Oct 2015 A1
20150339273 Yang et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150339276 Bloem et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150339543 Campanelli et al. Nov 2015 A1
20150348297 Kaasila et al. Dec 2015 A1
20160078656 Borson et al. Mar 2016 A1
20160092439 Ichimi Mar 2016 A1
20160140952 Graham May 2016 A1
20160170940 Levantovsky Jun 2016 A1
20160171343 Kaasila et al. Jun 2016 A1
20160182606 Kaasila et al. Jun 2016 A1
20160246762 Eaton Aug 2016 A1
20160307156 Burner Oct 2016 A1
20160307347 Matteson et al. Oct 2016 A1
20160321217 Ikemoto et al. Nov 2016 A1
20160371232 Ellis et al. Dec 2016 A1
20170017778 Ford et al. Jan 2017 A1
20170237723 Gupta et al. Aug 2017 A1
20180039605 Pao et al. Feb 2018 A1
20180075455 Kumnick et al. Mar 2018 A1
20180082156 Jin et al. Mar 2018 A1
Foreign Referenced Citations (21)
Number Date Country
0949574 Oct 1999 EP
2166488 Mar 2010 EP
2857983 Apr 2015 EP
06-258982 Sep 1994 JP
10-124030 May 1998 JP
2002-507289 Mar 2002 JP
2003-288184 Oct 2003 JP
05-215915 Aug 2005 JP
05-217816 Aug 2005 JP
07-011733 Jan 2007 JP
2009-545064 Dec 2009 JP
5140997 Nov 2012 JP
544595 Aug 2003 TW
200511041 Mar 2005 TW
WO 9423379 Oct 1994 WO
WO 9900747 Jan 1999 WO
WO 0191088 Nov 2001 WO
WO 03023614 Mar 2003 WO
WO 04012099 Feb 2004 WO
WO 05001675 Jan 2005 WO
WO 2008013720 Jan 2008 WO
Non-Patent Literature Citations (42)
Entry
Typeconnection, [online], “typeconnection”, Feb. 26, 2015, Retrieved from URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20150226074717/http://www.typeconnection.com:80/step1.php , 10 pages.
“A first experiment with multicoloured web fonts,” Manufactura Independente website, Feb. 28, 2011, Retrieved from the internet: http://blog.manufacturaindependente.org/2011/02/a-first-experiment-with-multicoloured-web-fonts/.
“Colorfont/vl,” Feb. 28, 2011, retrieved from the internet: http://manufacturaindependente.com/colorfont/vl/.
International Search Report & Written Opinion, PCT/US2013/076917, dated Jul. 9, 2014, 11 pages.
“Photofont.com—Use photofonts,” Sep. 2, 2012, retrieved from the internet: http://web.archive.org/web/20120902021143/http://photofont.com/photofont/use/web.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability issued in PCT application No. PCT/US2013/071519 dated Jun. 9, 2015, 9 pages.
Adobe Systems Incorporated, “The Type 42 Font Format Specification,” Technical Note #5012, Jul. 31, 1998, pp. 1-24.
Adobe Systems Incorporated, “PostScript Language Reference—Third Edition,” Feb. 1999, pp. 313-390.
Adobe Systems Incorporated, “To Unicode Mapping File Tutorial,” Adobe Technical Note, XP002348387, May 2003.
“Announcing Speakeasy: A new open-source language tool from Typekit,” Oct. 28, 2010, on-line http://blog.typekit.com/2010/10/28/announcing-speakeasy-a-new-open-source-language-tool-from-typekit/.
Apple Computers, “The True Type Font File,” Oct. 27, 2000, pp. 1-17.
Celik et al., “W3C, CSS3 Module: Fonts,” W3C Working Draft, Jul. 31, 2001, pp. 1-30.
International Search Report & Written Opinion issued in PCT application No. PCT/US10/01272, dated Jun. 15, 2010, 6 pages.
International Search Report & Written Opinion issued in PCT application No. PCT/US2011/034050 dated Jul. 15, 2011, 13 pages.
International Search Report & Written Opinion, PCT/US2013/026051, dated Jun. 5, 2013, 9 pages.
Japanese Office Action, 2009-521768, dated Aug. 28, 2012.
Supplementary European Search Report, European Patent Office, European patent application No. EP 07796924, dated Dec. 27, 2010, 8 pages.
TrueType Fundamentals, Microsoft Typography, Nov. 1997, pp. 1-17.
European Search Report, 14187549.2, dated Jul. 30, 2015 7 pages.
Saurabh, Kataria et al., “Font retrieval on a large scale: An experimental study”, 2010 17th IEEE International Conference on Image Processing (ICIP 2010); Sep. 26-29, 2010; Hong Kong, China, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, USA, Sep. 26, 2010, pp. 2177-2180.
Doughty, Mike, “Using OpenType® Fonts with Adobe® InDesign®,” Jun. 11, 2012 retrieved from the internet: http://webarchive.org/web/20121223032924/http://www.sketchpad.net/opentype-indesign.htm (retrieved Sep. 22, 2014), 2 pages.
Goswami, Gautum, “Quite ‘Writly’ Said!,” One Brick at a Time, Aug. 21, 2006, Retrieved from the internet: :http://gautamg.wordpress.com/2006/08/21/quj.te-writely-said/ (retrieved on Sep. 23, 2013), 3 pages.
International Search Report & Written Opinion, PCT/US2014/010786, dated Sep. 30, 2014, 9 pages.
Wenzel, Martin, “An Introduction to OpenType Substitution Features,” Dec. 26, 2012, Retrieved from the internet: http://web.archive.org/web/20121226233317/http://ilovetypography.com/OpenType/opentype-features. Html (retrieved on Sep. 18, 2014), 12 pages.
Extensis, Suitcase 10.2, Quick Start Guide for Macintosh, 2001, 23 pgs.
International Search Report & Written Opinion, PCT/US2013/071519, dated Mar. 5, 2013, 12 pages.
Open Text Exceed, User's Guide, Version 14, Nov. 2009, 372 pgs.
Universal Type Server, Upgrading from Suitcase Server, Sep. 29, 2009, 18 pgs.
Japanese Office Action, 2013-508184, dated Apr. 1, 2015.
International Search Report & Written Opinion, PCT/US2016/023282, dated Oct. 7, 2016, 16 pages.
Font Pair, [online]. “Font Pair”, Jan. 20, 2015, Retrieved from URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20150120231122/http://fontpair.co/, 31 pages.
European Search Report, 14184499.3, dated Jul. 13, 2015, 7 pages.
“Flash CS4 Professional ActionScript 2.0”, 2007, retrieved on http://help.adobe.com/en_US/AS2LCR/Flash_10.0/help.html?content=00000284.html on Aug. 31, 2015.
European Search Report, 13179728.4, dated Sep. 10, 2015, 3 pages.
Ma Wei-Ying et al., “Framework for adaptive content delivery in heterogeneous network environments”, Jan. 24, 2000, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.cooltown.hp.com/papers/adcon/MMCN2000.
“Saffron Type System”, retrieved from the internet Nov. 12, 2014, 7 pages.
Written Opposition to the grant of Japanese Patent No. 6097214 by Masatake Fujii, dated Sep. 12, 2017, 97 pages, with partial English translation.
Forums.macrumors.com' [online]. “which one is the main FONTS folder ?” May 19, 2006, [retrieved on Jun. 19, 2017]. Retrieved from the Internet: URL<https://forums.macrumors.com/threads/which-one-is-the-main-fontsfolder.202284/>, 7 pages.
International Preliminary Report on Patentability issued in PCT application No. PCT/US2015/066145 dated Jun. 20, 2017, 7 pages.
George Margulis, “Optical Character Recognition: Classification of Handwritten Digits and Computer Fonts”, Aug. 1, 2014, URL: https://web.archive.org/web/20140801114017/http://cs229.stanford.edu/proj2011/Margulis-OpticalCharacterRecognition.pdf.
Typeconnection, [online]. “typeconnection”, Feb. 26, 2015, Retrieved from URL: http://web.archive.org/web/20150226074717/http://www.typeconnection.com/stepl.php, 10 pages.
Supplementary European Search Report in European Patent Application No. EP 15871005, dated Aug. 1, 2018, 10 pages.
Related Publications (1)
Number Date Country
20140115453 A1 Apr 2014 US
Continuations (1)
Number Date Country
Parent 12769839 Apr 2010 US
Child 14138282 US