Markup Languages have attained wide popularity in recent years. One type of markup language, Extensible Markup Language (XML), is a universal language that provides a way to identify, exchange, and process various kinds of data. For example, XML is used to create documents that can be utilized by a variety of application programs. Elements of an XML file have an associated namespace and schema.
In XML, a namespace is a unique identifier for a collection of names that are used in XML documents as element types and attribute names. The name of a namespace is commonly used to uniquely identify each class of XML document. The unique namespaces differentiate markup elements that come from different sources and happen to have the same name.
XML Schemata provide a way to describe and validate data in an XML environment. A schema states what elements and attributes are used to describe content in an XML document, where each element is allowed, what types of text contents are allowed within it and which elements can appear within which other elements. The use of schemata ensures that the document is structured in a consistent manner. Schemata may be created by a user and generally supported by an associated markup language, such as XML. By using an XML editor, the user can manipulate the XML file and generate XML documents that adhere to the schema the user has created. XML documents may be created to adhere to one or more schemata.
Recently, some word processors have begun producing documents that are somewhat XML compatible. For example, some documents may be parsed using an application that understands XML. Many features of the word processor, however, are not stored within the XML file. For example, spelling and grammar state information is not stored within the XML file. What is needed is a way to store spelling and grammar state within an XML document.
The present invention is directed towards marking spelling and grammar errors and proofing state of a word-processing document within XML.
According to one aspect of the invention, markers are used to show where a spelling or grammar error has occurred within the document.
According to another aspect of the invention, the proof state of the document is also stored. For example, has the document been fully checked for spelling or grammatical errors.
According to another aspect of the invention, the word processing document stored as XML may be parsed by an application that understands XML even though it is not the creator of the document.
Throughout the specification and claims, the following terms take the meanings explicitly associated herein, unless the context clearly dictates otherwise.
The terms “markup language” or “ML” refer to a language for special codes within a document that specify how parts of the document are to be interpreted by an application. In a word-processor file, the markup language specifies how the text is to be formatted or laid out, whereas in a particular customer schema, the ML tends to specify the text's meaning according to that customer's wishes (e.g., customerName, address, etc. The ML is typically supported by a word-processor and may adhere to the rules of other markup languages, such as XML, while creating further rules of its own.
The term “element” refers to the basic unit of an ML document. The element may contain attributes, other elements, text, and other building blocks for an ML document.
The term “tag” refers to a command inserted in a document that delineates elements within an ML document. Each element can have no more than two tags: the start tag and the end tag. It is possible to have an empty element (with no content) in which case one tag is allowed.
The content between the tags is considered the element's “children” (or descendants). Hence other elements embedded in the element's content are called “child elements” or “child nodes” or the element. Text embedded directly in the content of the element is considered the element's “child text nodes”. Together, the child elements and the text within an element constitute that element's “content”.
The term “attribute” refers to an additional property set to a particular value and associated with the element. Elements may have an arbitrary number of attribute settings associated with them, including none. Attributes are used to associate additional information with an element that will not contain additional elements, or be treated as a text node.
Illustrative Operating Environment
With reference to
Computing device 100 may have additional features or functionality. For example, computing device 100 may also include additional data storage devices (removable and/or non-removable) such as, for example, magnetic disks, optical disks, or tape. Such additional storage is illustrated in
Computing device 100 may also contain communication connections 116 that allow the device to communicate with other computing devices 118, such as over a network. Communication connection 116 is one example of communication media. Communication media may typically be embodied by computer readable instructions, data structures, program modules, or other data in a modulated data signal, such as a carrier wave or other transport mechanism, and includes any information delivery media. The term “modulated data signal” means a signal that has one or more of its characteristics set or changed in such a manner as to encode information in the signal. By way of example, and not limitation, communication media includes wired media such as a wired network or direct-wired connection, and wireless media such as acoustic, RF, infrared and other wireless media. The term computer readable media as used herein includes both storage media and communication media.
Word-Processor File Structure and Spelling and Grammar
Many word processors have built in spelling and grammar checking to assist users while editing their files. These are extremely powerful and popular features.
Storing the spelling and grammar state as XML, helps to make it possible to use other tools to look at the documents and tell the state of that document. Additionally, storing the states as XML helps to improve performance when opening the files using the word processor. If all the spelling and grammar errors are already marked, then the word processor does not have to pass over the entire document to check for spelling & grammar errors every time it is opened. It only needs to examine the areas that the user changes.
In one embodiment, word-processor 120 has its own namespace or namespaces and a schema, or a set of schemas, that is defined for use with documents associated with word-processor 120. The set of tags and attributes defined by the schema for word-processor 120 define the format of a document to such an extent that it is referred to as its own native ML. Word-processor 120 internally validates ML file 210. When validated, the ML elements are examined as to whether they conform to the ML schema 215. A schema states what tags and attributes are used to describe content in an ML document, where each tag is allowed, and which tags can appear within other tags, ensuring that the documentation is structured the same way. Accordingly, ML 210 is valid when structured as set forth in arbitrary ML schema 215.
ML validation engine 225 operates similarly to other available validation engines for ML documents. ML validation engine 225 evaluates ML that is in the format of the ML validation engine 225. For example, XML elements are forwarded to an XML validation engine. In one embodiment, a greater number of validation engines may be associated with word-processor 120 for validating a greater number of ML formats.
There are enough ML elements for an application that understands XML to fully recreate the document from a single XML file. Hint tags may also be included that provide information to an application to help understand the content of the file. The text contained within the document follows the “text” tag, making it easy for an application to extract the text content from a word-processing document created in accordance with aspects of the invention.
Take an XML file that has the following sentence containing a grammatical error:
“I do be watching this.”
Also assume that the above sentence has an XML element <me:XML> applied to it around “be watching”, such that the output XML looks as illustrated in
Given that the example shown is valid, ML file 210 produces a document with a paragraph that includes the text “I do be watching this” in the first paragraph.
The phrase “do be” should be flagged as a grammar error. In order to maintain well formedness, the XML tag representing the error start can not be placed outside of the <me:XML> tag and end inside of it. For example, the following is not well formed XML:
<para>
<run>
</run>
<GrammarError>
<me:XML>
</me:XML>
<run>
</run>
</para>
The following list is an exemplary list of proofErr types:
<xsd:simpleType name=“proofErrType”>
<xsd:restriction base=“xsd:string”>
</xsd:restriction>
</xsd:simpleType>
According to one embodiment, the ignored spelling error is not marked, and would, therefore, be re-flagged if there were no state information. A spelling error is explicitly marked with XML, but an ignored error has no marking. Any misspelling that is not flagged (when the proof state is clear), can be assumed to have already been ignored by the user.
The following is a commented definition for the proofState element that defines the state of the document:
<xsd:element name=“proofState” type=“proofProperty” minOccurs=“0”>
<xsd:annotation>
</xsd:annotation>
</xsd:element>
<xsd:complexType name=“proofProperty”>
<xsd:annotation>
</xsd:annotation>
<xsd:attribute name=“spelling” type=“proofType” use=“optional”>
</xsd:attribute>
<xsd:attribute name=“grammar” type=“proofType” use=“optional”>
</xsd:attribute>
</xsd:complexType>
<xsd:simpleType name=“proofType”>
<xsd:annotation>
</xsd:annotation>
<xsd:restriction base=“xsd:string”>
</xsd:restriction>
</xsd:simpleType>
The above specification, examples and data provide a complete description of the manufacture and use of the composition of the invention. Since many embodiments of the invention can be made without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention, the invention resides in the claims hereinafter appended.
This patent application is a continuation-in-part application under 35 United States Code §120 of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 10/187,060 filed on Jun. 28, 2002, which is incorporated herein by reference. An exemplary schema in accordance with the present invention is disclosed beginning on page 11 in an application entitled “Mixed Content Flexibility,” Ser. No. 10/726,077, filed Dec. 2, 2003, which is hereby incorporated by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4751740 | Wright | Jun 1988 | A |
4864501 | Kucera et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
4866777 | Mulla et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
5185818 | Warnock | Feb 1993 | A |
5295266 | Hinsley et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5557722 | DeRose et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5579466 | Habib et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5586241 | Bauermeister et al. | Dec 1996 | A |
5781714 | Collins et al. | Jul 1998 | A |
5787451 | Mogilevsky | Jul 1998 | A |
5881225 | Worth | Mar 1999 | A |
5895476 | Orr et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
6023714 | Hill et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6031989 | Cordell | Feb 2000 | A |
6044387 | Angiulo et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6092068 | Dinkelacker | Jul 2000 | A |
6119136 | Takata et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6141754 | Choy | Oct 2000 | A |
6182029 | Friedman | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6209124 | Vermeire et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6230173 | Ferrel et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6233592 | Schnelle et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6249794 | Raman | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6336124 | Alam et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6397232 | Cheng-Hung et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6507856 | Chen et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6507857 | Yalcinalp | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6519617 | Wanderski et al. | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6535896 | Britton et al. | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6538673 | Maslov | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6613098 | Sorge et al. | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6675353 | Friedman | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6697999 | Breuer et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6725423 | Muramoto et al. | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6725426 | Pavlov | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6754648 | Fittges et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6763500 | Black et al. | Jul 2004 | B2 |
6785685 | Soetarman et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6799299 | Li et al. | Sep 2004 | B1 |
6829570 | Thambynayagam et al. | Dec 2004 | B1 |
6829745 | Yassin et al. | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6845483 | Carroll | Jan 2005 | B1 |
6886115 | Kondoh et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6918086 | Rogson | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6928610 | Brintzenhofe et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6938204 | Hind et al. | Aug 2005 | B1 |
6941510 | Ozzie et al. | Sep 2005 | B1 |
6954898 | Nakai et al. | Oct 2005 | B1 |
6968503 | Chang et al. | Nov 2005 | B1 |
6996772 | Justice et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7028009 | Wang et al. | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7257772 | Jones et al. | Aug 2007 | B1 |
7275209 | Jones et al. | Sep 2007 | B1 |
7376650 | Ruhlen | May 2008 | B1 |
7389473 | Sawicki et al. | Jun 2008 | B1 |
20010014900 | Brauer et al. | Aug 2001 | A1 |
20010032217 | Huang | Oct 2001 | A1 |
20020087702 | Mori | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020091725 | Skok | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020124115 | McLean et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020184189 | Hay et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030007014 | Suppan et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030018668 | Britton et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030101416 | McInnes et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030135584 | Roberts et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030163784 | Daniel et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030167444 | Zorc | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030231626 | Chuah et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040073871 | Giannetti | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040098320 | Mitsuhashi et al. | May 2004 | A1 |
20040194035 | Chakraborty | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20040205553 | Hall et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040210818 | Jones et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20050102265 | Jones et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050108198 | Jones et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
20050108278 | Jones et al. | May 2005 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1230566 | Aug 2002 | EP |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 10187060 | Jun 2002 | US |
Child | 10727299 | US |