Electronic commerce between businesses has gained substantial momentum. Electronic marketplaces and XML or similar documents have begun to replace traditional EDI formats for commerce-related documents. Still, many businesses, particularly small and medium sized businesses, have not adopted automated EDI or XML transaction processing. It remains easier for large trading partners to generate XML or similar documents than it is for small to medium sized businesses to adopt the technology needed to processing them. In addition, a full scale conversion to EDI or XML transaction processing may involve far more documents than a small to medium sized business can practically convert, either within a workable timeframe or a reasonable budget.
Therefore, it is desirable to introduce methods and devices that allow users to read and understand XML and similar documents generated by their trading partners without extensive programming. It is also desirable to introduce methods and devices that are extensible, that can display in a meaningful format field types that are not referenced in output formats.
The present invention includes a method of providing users with formatted access to XML and similar documents received from trading partners using a general purpose viewer or browser. Particular aspects of the present invention are described in the claims, specification and drawings.
The following detailed description is made with reference to the figures. Preferred embodiments are described to illustrate the present invention, not to limit its scope, which is defined by the claims. Those of ordinary skill in the art will recognize a variety of equivalent variations on the description that follows.
The document sent by the entity includes tagged fields. A sample document having two different types of tagged fields is illustrated in
Referring to
On the server 110 of
One schema for persistently storing documents is illustrated by
The service 112 may give notice to the user 150 of receipt of the document by messaging, posting or any other practical means. One or more users may be given notice, based on the identity of the sending entity, the identity of the receiving entity or the document type. One syntax for subscription by a user is Subscription=sender ID.recipient ID.document type. To receive all Order documents from a particular sending entity, a user could subscribe as follows: Subscription=S1234.*.Order. This subscription would cause the service 112 to notify the user 150 of receipt of order type documents from sending entity S1234. Security features of a system would, of course, restrict access by the user 150 those receiving entities for which the user was authorized. Notice may be given by messaging, such as e-mail or a Lotus Notes messaging protocol. A message may include a subject, such as, “Five new documents received,” header text generally stating that new documents have been received or that old documents remain to be viewed. The e-mail may further include body text providing the date, number and sending parties' identities for documents received. The body text may further provide detail regarding individual documents received, such as the document type, sender identity and date or time of receipt. A footer may identify the location for viewing the document, such as by a click through URL. Alternatively, notice may be given by posting at a location to which the user has access. A combination of the two may be used, such as posting to location from which e-mail notices are generated if the user does not promptly access the list. E-mails based on the status of accessing a posted notice may be sent periodically and may include increasingly strong wording or additional addressees, based on the type and/or aging of the received document.
In interface by which the user may access a stored document is illustrated in
The processing of user requests to view a document can be understood by referring again to
One aspect of the present invention is the selection logic 144 to select a tagged fields format for display sheet to apply to a particular document. As a shorthand, a tagged fields format for display sheet may be referred to as a stylesheet. A stylesheet can be applied to format a document for manual viewing either one it is received or in response to a user request. Formatting a document when it is received requires automatic selection of tagged fields format for display sheet and storage of the transformed document, as well as original document. The transformed document can take a form of an HTML document, PostScript document, and an ASCII document or any other view will format. The transformed document can be stored the same persistent storage 114 as the original document or in other storage. Alternatively, formatting can be applied for manual viewing in response to user request. In this case, selection of a tagged fields format for display sheet can be automatic or can present a tailored list of choices to user for user selection.
Automatic selection of style sheets may be supported by the system of default in progressively more customized style sheets. A hierarchical, rule based selection may be used. For instance, one or more default style sheets may be provided at level 0. Alternative style sheets of level 0 may be distinguished based on the amount of data received in an incoming document. For instance, style sheets may be provided for incoming documents smaller and larger than 25,600 bytes. Style sheets at level below 0 may be customized based on a number of attributes associated with a document. The attributes may include document type, marketplace identity for the marketplace from which the document originated, portal identity for further identification when a marketplace is hosted by more than one portal, sender identity for the trading partner that sent the document, receiver ID for the trading partner and to whom the document is addressed, and status of reviewing the document or its attachments. A further attribute which may be useful in selecting a stylesheet is an identifier for the schema used to understand the types of tagged fields appearing in the document, if the tagged fields are compliant with a schema. One hierarchy of levels which can be used to select a stylesheet is:
A stylesheet can be selected using a tagged field of the document or a property associated with the document or user. A user can combine tagged field and property information in any way to create a stylesheet selection rule. Selection logic can, for example, load all of the default and user created rules and apply them at runtime, substituting values of tagged fields and properties for keywords appearing in rules. Alternative decision rules can be applied. For instance, a stylesheet may be selected on the basis of which rule level it satisfies, selecting the stylesheet which is most customized to the substituted values. Applying this procedure, style sheets could be stored in the database or a simple directory tree. The directory tree might be structured as follows:
Applying the directory tree structure such as this, the selection logic could construct directory paths and test to determine whether a tagged field format for display sheet exists in each of the constructed paths. Alternatively, rules could be selected on the basis that the rule with the most matches wins. The following table may reside be used to track style sheets:
The selection logic can query the table based on the DocumentType and iterate through the result list. As it iterates through the result list, it will can rank each of the result list that qualified. A record that does not qualify will be dropped from the ranking list. The record with the highest ranking number will be the one get selected. For instance, for a PO document was sent to XYZ from ABC. The selector will have the following result list:
Applying this approach, the selection logic would select Rule ID #1 since it has higher ranking. In another instance, consider a Pizza Document was sent by PizzaHut in a New York GMP. The selector will have the following result list:
The selection logic would select Rule ID #11 since it has the high-ranking. The selection system need not be hierarchical in order to supply default in alternative rules. Combinations of tagged field values and document properties may be used in any way practical to select an applicable stylesheet or the best applicable stylesheet.
An individual user selects or is assigned to a locale. A locale is a more general concept than a language, because the same language (e.g., English) can be spoken in distinctly different ways (e.g., British and American English). Data received from trading partner may be transformed for display based on the locale or language of the user. One aspect of the present invention is that selection of one from a plurality of tagged field format for display sheets may correspond to localization of the display to match the language or locale of the user. Organization and locale can be combined to select a tagged field format for display sheet; they may be combined with the content of one or more tagged fields or properties of the document. A particular tagged field format for display sheet or one or more modules supporting that particular sheet can be stored on disk or remote storage until needed. One aspect of the present invention is loading the selected tagged field format for display sheet or modules supporting it from disk or remote storage after selecting it.
Many aspects of the present invention are further illustrated in the following code. This code includes a hierarchy of included files for a default stylesheet, as follows:
The default stylesheet further includes a feature to allow outlining features of collapsing and revealing detail.
Those of skill in the relevant arts will find the code in the accompanying source code appendix, which is incorporated by reference, to be instructive in carrying out aspects of the invention which have been presented more generally.
The methods illustrated above can be extended by services beyond viewing a document. A document which can be read also can be printed. Print formats can be selected by rules, using the most specific format available: if a print format is available for a combination of trading partner and document type, use that format; if a print format is available for a document type, use that format; if a base format is available for a portal war receiving party, use that format; and, in all cases, a default print format is available to use.
A document map repository may support a copying service, to transform a document from one document to another or from one type of document to another. A new document can be prepared using old documents template, by copying the old document and editing it. A new type of document can be prepared from an old document using document mapping supported by a schema. Static maps may be stored in the database 116 which map tagged fields from one document type to another document type. Copy functionality may, for instance, translate a purchase order into an acceptance or shipping confirmation.
Reply functionality may be supported as a variation on copy functionality, with addressing added. A simple reply may include an unedited version of the document received. A more elaborate reply may permit a user to edit the document received before responding. It may or may not track the changes made. A yet more elaborate reply may provide a user with a variety of transformations which are standard in replying to a particular type of document.
Export functionality may be provided to map one document type to another for editing outside the system. A simple export also may be provided for transforming a document into a tax or were processor format.
Type and send functionality may be provided from either templates of documents used by an organization or from a copy or transformation of a document selected by the user. Preferably, a JavaScript module is provided to update the values of tagged fields based on edits made by the user at the browser. The JavaScript technology described above is readily adapted to carry out this action. An editing functionality may be extended by a verification function, which would take codes entered by the user and verify that they translate into valid addressees, etc., or it could for simply display the translation of the codes. An editing function may be further extended with pull-down selection menus for addresses, using either a dictionary or a list of recently used values.
Corollary to a template facility is a draft document facility. The interface in
Another improvement to the XSLT programming language is conditional loading of modules of an XSLT style sheet. This improvement includes defining a conditional syntax for including an XSLT module from disk in an XSLT style sheet, parsing the XSLT style sheet utilizing the conditional syntax, determining whether a condition specified in the conditional syntax succeeds or fails, and loading the XSLT module from disk if the condition succeeds. This is distinct from and in addition to the selection of a stylesheet described above.
A variable containing a URI value can be used in conjunction with the system in
Many combinations of features discussed above can be combined in useful combinations. Some of the useful combinations are set forth in the claims below.
While the preceding examples are cast in terms of a method, devices and systems employing this method are easily understood. A magnetic memory containing a program capable of practicing the claimed method is one such device. A computer system having memory loaded with a program practicing the claimed method is another such device.
While the present invention is disclosed by reference to the preferred embodiments and examples detailed above, it is understood that these examples are intended in an illustrative rather than in a limiting sense. It is contemplated that modifications and combinations will readily occur to those skilled in the art, which modifications and combinations will be within the spirit of the invention and the scope of the following claims.
This application is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 14/054,777 filed 15 Oct. 2013, entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR VIEWING ELECTRONIC COMMERCE-RELATED DOCUMENTS,” now U.S. Pat. No. 9,262,388 on 16 Feb. 2016, which is a continuation application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/190,493 filed 12 Aug. 2008, entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR VIEWING ELECTRONIC COMMERCE-RELATED DOCUMENTS,” now U.S. Pat. No. 8,561,022 on 15 Oct. 2013, which is a divisional of application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/794,302 filed 27 Feb. 2001, entitled “METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR VIEWING ELECTRONIC COMMERCE-RELATED DOCUMENTS,” now U.S. Pat. No. 7,415,669, issued on 19 Aug. 2008. These applications are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4402569 | Bow et al. | Sep 1983 | A |
4418689 | Kanazawa et al. | Dec 1983 | A |
4944738 | Rodriguez | Jul 1990 | A |
5269779 | Sogawa et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5300061 | Easley et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5557722 | DeRose et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5557798 | Skeen et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5607420 | Schuman | Mar 1997 | A |
5662646 | Fumich | Sep 1997 | A |
5675805 | Boldo et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5684985 | Ahmadi | Nov 1997 | A |
5706502 | Foley et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5733279 | Konwitz et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5734916 | Greenfield et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5742845 | Wagner | Apr 1998 | A |
5772658 | Konwitz et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5778400 | Tateno et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5790677 | Fox et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5802539 | Daniels | Sep 1998 | A |
5812999 | Tateno | Sep 1998 | A |
5860073 | Ferrel et al. | Jan 1999 | A |
5923833 | Freund et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
5963641 | Crandall et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5983200 | Slotznick | Nov 1999 | A |
6012098 | Bayeh et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6023714 | Hill et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6026432 | Potts, Jr. | Feb 2000 | A |
6049785 | Gifford | Apr 2000 | A |
6055513 | Katz et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6125391 | Meltzer et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6138129 | Combs | Oct 2000 | A |
6175843 | Muramoto et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6216158 | Luo et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6226675 | Meltzer et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6230173 | Ferrel | May 2001 | B1 |
6230201 | Guck et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6240407 | Chang et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6243501 | Jamali | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6311194 | Sheth et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6330573 | Salisbury et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6330574 | Murashita et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6338067 | Baker et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6360215 | Judd et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6421656 | Cheng et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6480860 | Monday | Nov 2002 | B1 |
6493702 | Adar et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6507857 | Yalcinalp | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6519617 | Wanderski et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6538673 | Maslov | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6553364 | Wu | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6582474 | LaMarca et al. | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6584480 | Ferrel | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6585778 | Hind et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6589291 | Boag et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6591260 | Schwarzhoff et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6635089 | Burkett et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6650433 | Keane et al. | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6684204 | Lal | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6699239 | Stiller et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6715129 | Hind et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6721727 | Chau et al. | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6763343 | Brooke et al. | Jul 2004 | B1 |
6799299 | Li et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6826597 | Lonnroth et al. | Nov 2004 | B1 |
6874122 | Bates et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6874141 | Swamy et al. | Mar 2005 | B1 |
6917937 | Rubendall | Jul 2005 | B1 |
6941511 | Hind et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6959429 | Hatcher et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
7010533 | Kutsumi et al. | Mar 2006 | B1 |
7036072 | Sulistio et al. | Apr 2006 | B1 |
7058886 | Sulistio et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7072984 | Polonsky et al. | Jul 2006 | B1 |
7089583 | Mehra et al. | Aug 2006 | B2 |
7237191 | Sulistio et al. | Jun 2007 | B1 |
7266766 | Claussen et al. | Sep 2007 | B1 |
7266814 | Bosworth et al. | Sep 2007 | B2 |
7278096 | Sulistio et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7305614 | Chen et al. | Dec 2007 | B2 |
7310350 | Shao et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7321870 | Comiskey et al. | Jan 2008 | B1 |
7380206 | Usuda | May 2008 | B1 |
7415669 | Davidson et al. | Aug 2008 | B1 |
7631298 | Kaler et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7685252 | Maes et al. | Mar 2010 | B1 |
7707492 | Zaharkin | Apr 2010 | B2 |
8504988 | DeGroote et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
20010049650 | Moshal et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20010056429 | Moore et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020002586 | Rafal et al. | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020049788 | Lipkin et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020054090 | Silva et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020069083 | Harter et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020073001 | Palmer et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020078092 | Kim | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020083093 | Goodisman et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020087592 | Ghani | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020099735 | Schroeder et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020107763 | Palmer et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020107881 | Patel | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020116421 | Fox et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020135621 | Angiulo et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020143818 | Roberts et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020143823 | Stevens | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020147847 | Brewster et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020156803 | Maslov et al. | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20030041076 | Lucovsky et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030065874 | Marron et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030088824 | Ayan | May 2003 | A1 |
20030125929 | Bergstraesser et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030140034 | Probst et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030208473 | Lennon | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20040162773 | Del Rey et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040205448 | Grefenstette et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040205456 | Hammock et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040205459 | Green | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040205615 | Birder | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040205644 | Shaughnessy et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050251742 | Mogilevsky et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20060156224 | Sulistio et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20080301544 | Davidson et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20080306883 | Baffier et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090043798 | Tan et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20100333153 | Sahota et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0704795 | Apr 1996 | EP |
9834179 | Aug 1998 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Bergeron, F., et al., “Managing EDI for corporate advantage: A longitudinal study,” Information &Management, 31, 1997, pp. 319-333, Elsevier. |
Bonometti, R. J., et al., “The Walls Coming Down: Interoperability Opens the Electronic City,” The Future of the Electronic Marketplace, The MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1998, pp. 265-301. |
Bort, R., et al., “EDI on the Internet,” Handbook of EDI, 1997, pp. B7-1-B7-19, Warren, Gorham & Lamont, USA. |
Gallego, I., et al., “Distributed Models for Brokerage on Electronic Commerce,” TREC'98, LINCS 1402, 1998, pp. 129-140, Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg. |
Garguilo, J. J., et al., “Guidlines for the Evaluation of Electronic data Interchange Products,” DRAFT—Technical Report CAML/CLS, Dec. 6, 1995, Gaithersburg, MD, USA. |
Ghosh, S., “Making Business Sense of the Internet,” Harvard Business Review, Mar.-Apr. 1998, pp. 126-135. |
Li-Pheng, K., “The Potential of Intelligent Software Agents in the World Wide Web in Automating Part Procurement,” International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, Jan. 1998, pp. 46-52. |
Riggins, F., et al., “Toward a Unified View of Electronic Commerce,” Communications of the ACM, Oct. 1998, vol. 41, No. 10, pp. 88-95. |
Rodrigues, J. R., et al, “IBM Websphere Transcoding Publisher Version 1.1: Extending Web Applications to the Pervasive World”, IBM Redbook, 2000, 336 pages. |
Clark, J., “XSL Transformations (XSLT),” Version 1.0 W3C Recommendation Nov. 16, 1999, pp. 1-102. |
Ide, N., “The XML Framework and Its Implications for Corpus Access and Use,” published 2000, pp. 1-5. |
Kay, M., “XLST 2.0 and XPath 2.0, Programmer's Reference, 4th edtiion”, Wiley Publising, Inc., 2008, 1371 pages. |
Kay, M., “Things XSLT Can't Do”, retrieved from: >www.dpawson.co.uk/xsl/sect2/nono.html#d1874e495> (accessed Aug. 9, 2012), 19 pages. |
Seilonen, et al., “Experience from the Development of an XML/XSLT-based Integration Server for a Virtual Enterprise Type Co-Operation,” published by 7th International Conference on Concurrent Enterprising Jun. 27-29, 2001, pp. 1-8. |
Nair, D. R., “Visual Design Versus Development: A Case Study Presenting How XML and XSLT can separate Presentation From Data,” published by University of Florida, 2001, pp. 1-97. |
Harold, E.R., “XML: Extensible Markup Language,” IDG Books Worldwide, Inc., Foster City, CA, Copyright 1998, pp. 14-15, 37-42 and 259-271 (23 pages total). |
Eddy, S. T., et al., “Teach Yourself XML,” IDG Books Worldwide, Inc., Foster City, CA, .COPYRGT. 1999, pp. 303-313 and 433-443. |
Holman, G.K., “What is XSLT”, Retrieved from: <http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2000/08/holman/index.html>, Dec. 7, 2000, pp. 1-337. |
“The American Heritage College Dictionary,” 4th Edition, Houghton Mifflin Co., Boston, Copyright 2002, p. 705. |
Freire, J., et al., “WebViews: Accessing Personalized Web Content and Services”, WWW 10, Hong Kong, May 1-5, 2001, pp. 576-586. |
“Deja Power Search Graphical User interface”, downloaded from: www.exit109.com/.about.jeremy/news/deja.html, .COPYRGT. Feb. 12, 2000, pp. 1-20. |
Altinel, M., et al., “Efficient Filtering of XML Documents for Seletive Dissemination of Information”, Proceedings of the VLDB Conference, Cairo, Egypt, Sep. 10-14, 2000, pp. 53-64. |
Ambroziak, J., “Managing Tokenizers in XML Search”, XML Europe 2000, Paris, France, Jun. 12-16, 2000, pp. 1-7 (plus citation). |
“GCA Conference Flyers”, XML Europe 2000, Paris, France, Jun. 12-16, 2000, pp. 1-2. |
“XML Query Engine Provides Initial XQuery Support”, XML Coverpages, downloaded from: xml.coverpages.org/ni2001-04-27-c.html, Apr. 27, 2001, 1 page. |
Egnor, D., et al., “Structured Information Retrieval Using XML”, Proceedings of the ACM SIGIR 2000 Workshop on XML and Information Retrieval, Athens, Greece, Jul. 2000, pp. 1-10, Retrieved from the internet: <web.archive.org/web/20010723114842/http://www.haifa.il.ibm.com/sigir00-xm- l/final-papers/Egnor/>. |
Carlson, D., “Modeling XML Vocabularies with UML: Part I,” Aug. 22, 2001, Retrieved from the internet: <http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2001/08/22/uml.html>, pp. 1-5. |
Bray, T., et al. (ed). “Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.0,” W3C Recommendation, Feb. 10, 1998, Retrieved from the internet: <http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210>, 37 pages. |
Chappell, D., “Simple Object Access Protocol (SOAP),” Microsoft Windows: Simple Object Access Protocol Technical Article, Sep. 10, 1999, Microsoft Corporation, 6 pages. |
Hung, P.E, et al. “DCOM and CORBA Side by Side, Step by Step, and Layer by Layer,” Copyright 1997, Retrieved from the internet: <http://www.cs.wustl.edu/˜schmidt/submit/Paper.html>, 24 pgs. |
Finn, Tim, et al. “KQML as an Agent Communication Language,” DRAFT, Baltimore MD, USA, Sep. 1995, 22 pages. |
Fuchs, M., “Domain Specific Languages for ad hoc Distributed Applications,” USENIX Association, Conference on Domain-Specific Languages, Oct. 15-17, 1997, pp. 27-35. |
Howes, T., et al. “A Scalable, Deployable, Directory Service Framework for the Internet,” Jul. 11, 1995, Retrieved from the Internet: <http://infor.isoc.org/HMP/PAPER/173/html/paper.html>, 12 pages. |
Khoo, L., et al., “The Potential of Intelligent Software Agents in the World Wide Web in Automating Part Procurement,” International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, Jan. 1998, pp. 46-52. |
Kimbrough, S. O., et al. “On Automated Message Processing in Electronic Commerce and Work Support Systems: Speech Act Theory and Expressive Felicity,” ACM Transactions on Information Systems, vol. 15, No. 4, Oct. 1997, pp. 321-367, New York, NY, USA. |
Tenenbaum, J., et al.,“Eco System: An Internet Commerce Architecture,” IEEE Computer Journal, May 1997, pp. 48-55. |
“The Internet—Untangling the Web,” The Economist, Apr. 23, 1998, 3 pages. |
Brickley, D., et al., “Resource Description Framework (RDF) Schema Specification”, W3C Proposed Recommendation Mar. 3, 1999, W3C XP-002203858, Retrieved from the Internet: <http://w3.org/TR/1999/PR-rdf-schema-19990303>, pp. 1-29. |
Beech, D., et al. (ed). “XML Schema Part 1: Structures”, W3C Working Draft May 6, 1999, W3C XP-002203859, Retrieved from the internet: <http://www.w3.org/1999/05/06-xmlschema-1>, pp. 1-53. |
Biron, P. V. et al. (ed.) “XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes” World Wide Web Consortium Working Draft May 6, 1999, W3C XP-00203860, Retrieved from the internet: <http://www.w3.org/1999/05/06-xmlschema-2>, pp. 1-28. |
Brown, K., “BizTalk: Fluent in E-Business”, XP-002203861, Copyright Dec. 1999, pp. 1-6. |
Yeong, W., et al. “Lightweight Directory Access Protocol”, ISODE Consortium, Mar. 1995, 20 pages. |
Moats, R., “URN Syntax,” AT&T, May 1997, pp. 1-7. |
Narayanaswamy, K. et al. “An Incremental Mechanism for Schema Evolution in Engineering Domains”, IEEE 1988, pp. 294-300. |
Klarlund, N., et al. “Document Structure Description 1.0”, AT&T and BRICS 1999, XP-002203865, pp. 1-34. |
Davidson, A., et al. “Schema for Object-Oriented XML 2.0” W3C Note Jul. 30, 1999, W3C XP-002203857, Retrieved from: <http://www.w3.org/1999/07/NOTE-SOX-19990730>, pp. 1-22. |
Liechti, O., et al. “Structured graph format: XML metadata for describing Web site structure,” Computer Networks and ISDN Systems 30 (1998), 11 pages. |
Kristensen, A., “Template resolution in XML/HTML” Computer Networks ISDN Systems 30 (1998) pp. 239-249. |
Dudeck, J., “Aspects of Implementing and Harmonizing Healthcare Communication Standards,” Institute of Medical Informatics 48 (1998), pp. 163-171. |
“Document Object Model (DOM) Tutorial,” Oct. 30, 2000, Retrieved from the internet: <http://web.archive.org/web/20010212070738/http://www.thescarms.com/XML/DOMTutorial.asp>, pp. 1-10. |
“XML and EDI: Peaceful Co-Esistence,” 2001, Xedi.org White Paper, pp. 1-15. |
Van Der Vlist, E., “Comparing XML Schema Languages,” Dec. 12, 2001, Retrieved from the internet: <http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2001/12/12/schemacompare.html>, pp. 1-7. |
Ogbuji, C., “Validating XML with Schematron,” Nov. 22, 2000, Retrieved from the Internet: http://www.xml.com/pub/a/2000/11/11/22/schematron.html>, pp. 1-8. |
Harold, E.R., et al. “XML in a Nutshell,” Jan. 2001, Retrieved from the internet: http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/xmlnut/chapter/ch09.html>, pp. 1-20. |
Clark, J., “XML Path Language (Xpath): Version 1.0”, W3C Recommendation Nov. 16, 1999, downloaded from: www.w3.org/TR/xpath, 33 pages. Retrieved from internet: <http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xpath-1999116.html> on Dec. 5, 2011, 33 pages. |
“Deja Power Search Graphical User interface”, Sep. 23, 1999, Retrieved from: <web.archive.org/web/19991008231252/http://www.exit109.com/.about.jeremy/n- ews/deja.html>, 20 pages. |
U.S. Appl. No. 13/460,399, Non Final Action, Sep. 19, 2014, 6 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20160162453 A1 | Jun 2016 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 09794302 | Feb 2001 | US |
Child | 12190493 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 14054777 | Oct 2013 | US |
Child | 15042082 | US | |
Parent | 12190493 | Aug 2008 | US |
Child | 14054777 | US |