The invention pertains to digital data processing and, more particularly, to methods and apparatus for facilitating digital data information storage and retrieval operations, e.g., data create, read, update, and delete operations.
In today's marketplace, many advanced data management systems focus on providing back-end support for data storage and retrieval. They are generally geared towards developers, who use Application Programming Interfaces (APIs) supplied with the packages to write “one-off” applications (e.g., with Java Swing) that permit users to create, access, delete and otherwise “interface” with the data. While this facilitates (and, indeed, necessitates) customization, a drawback is increased time and expense at inception and throughout the lifetime of each custom application. This has led to slow adoption of many advanced data management technologies by business enterprises and the like.
One advanced data management technology that is coming to the fore is semantic data management. These are technologies that utilize knowledge space-specific vocabularies to improve data retrieval, if not also data storage. In addition to the hurdles discussed above, however, current semantic data packages typically do not provide security features desired by many enterprises (e.g., financial institutions). The packages focus, instead, on improving data retrieval and, as a consequence, necessitate increased attention to security by application developers.
An object of the invention is to provide improved methods and apparatus for digital data processing.
A further object of the invention is to provide such methods and apparatus as facilitate digital data information storage and retrieval. A related object of the invention is to provide such methods and apparatus as facilitate data creation, retrieval, update and deletion (“CRUD”) operations.
A further related object is to provide such methods and apparatus as facilitate the development and life-time maintenance of data management applications.
A still further object of the invention is to provide such methods and apparatus as ensure data security.
A yet still further object of the invention is to provide such methods and apparatus as are adapted for use with semantic data systems, as well as other advanced data technologies.
The foregoing objects are among those attained by the invention which provides, in one aspect, a digital data processing system for information storage and retrieval that includes a first digital data processor (e.g., personal computer, workstation, server, mainframe, etc.) coupled to a second digital data processor and a data store (e.g., a RDF data store, relational database, etc.). The first digital data processor creates, reads, updates and/or deletes data from the data store (i.e., “CRUD” operations) based on a model generated by the first digital data processor. The model comprises an ontology and a set of constraints that are applied to data characterized by the ontology.
In related aspects, the invention provides a digital data processing system for information storage and retrieval as described above in which the first digital data processor displays a user interface (UI) for performing CRUD operations. In further related aspects, the invention provides such a digital data processing system in which the UI is based on the model and code generated therefrom, e.g., by the first digital data processor and/or the second digital data processor. In still further related aspects, the invention provides such a digital data processing system in which the UI includes a plurality of data fields, each data field associated with one or more data labels (e.g., “SSN”) and one or more data values (e.g., “0000000000”).
In related aspects, the invention provides a digital data processing system for information storage and retrieval as described above in which the set of constraints include, for example, security rules (e.g., denying or allowing selected CRUD operations), validators (e.g., defining a minimum and/or maximum length for a data value, defining permissible data value character types), default values (e.g., “0,” NULL, etc.), field masking (e.g., only transmitting the last 4 digits of a social security number for display in the UI).
In related aspects, the invention provides a digital data processing system for information storage and retrieval as described above in which the data labels are defined by the ontology and the data values are defined by any of the model (e.g., according to a default value constraint), and the first digital data processor (e.g., in response to a CRUD operation performed via the UI).
In related aspects, the invention provides a digital data processing system for information storage and retrieval as described above in which the second digital data processor masks a selected portion of one or more data values prior to generation and display of the UI on the first digital data processor, wherein said masking is based on one or more constraints defined in the model. In further related aspects, the invention provides a digital data processing system for information storage and retrieval as described above in which the first digital data processor generates a UI that displays portions of the data values that are not masked, and does not display the masked portions of said data values.
In related aspects, the invention provides a digital data processing system for information storage and retrieval as described above in which the first and/or second digital data processors generate a warning in response to user-input entered via the first digital data processor. In further related aspects, the invention provides a digital data processing system as described above in which the warning is generated in accord with the one or more constraints defined by the model (e.g., minimum or maximum data value length). In still further related aspects, the invention provides a digital data processing system as described above in which the first digital data processor displays said warning to a user and/or administrator.
In related aspects, the invention provides a digital data processing system for information storage and retrieval as described above in which the second digital data processor displays a UI for defining the constraints of the model. For example, the UI may include a serious of menus, check boxes, fields, etc., for creating, customizing, and associating security rules, default values, validators, and field masking constraints with data characterized in the ontology.
Still other aspects of the invention provide methods paralleling the operations described above.
These and other aspects of the invention are evident in the drawings and text that follows.
A more complete understanding of the invention may be attained by reference to the drawings, in which:
Illustrated digital data processors 20-50 execute in a network environment. In other embodiments, digital data processors 20-50 may operate alone or in other environments, networked or otherwise. In any event, illustrated digital data processors 20-50 are coupled to each other, as shown, via a network 70, such as the Internet, a local-area network (LAN), wide-area network (WAN), or otherwise, that may be public, private, IP-based, etc.
In a typical embodiment, illustrated here, digital data processor 20 comprises a personal computer, workstation, mainframe, or other digital data processing apparatus, as discussed above, and is used by a developer or analyst (collectively, “analyst), to build, test, and deploy a software platform providing CRUD editing capabilities to a client 30, as discussed further below. The digital data processor 20 executes a variety of applications for creating such a platform, including, for example, an ontology editor 21 and a semantic editing framework (SEF) 23. The illustrated ontology editor 21 creates an ontology 22 (e.g., either automatically or via analyst input) that defines a structure of data (e.g., RDF data stored in data store 60, discussed below). This may include a text editor, an interpreter/compiler, libraries, or otherwise—all of the type known in the art, albeit as adapted in accord with the teachings hereof. In the illustrated embodiment, the editor 21 creates the ontology 22 with the Web Ontology Language (OWL), although in other embodiments the editor 21 may use other ontology-definition languages, as well.
The illustrated SEF 23 defines (e.g., via analyst input) user roles (e.g., Supervisor, Analyst, Administrator, etc.), security rules, validators, default values, field masking, and/or other constraints 24 (collectively, “constraints”) that are applied to data characterized by the ontology 22. In the illustrated embodiment, the constraints 24 are defined in XML, although in other embodiments it may be otherwise. The SEF 23 generates a semantic model 25 (or simply, “model”) by combining the ontology 22 and constraints 23 into a cohesive file (or set of files). Accordingly, in the illustrated embodiment, the model 25 is the “foundation” for providing CRUD capabilities to the client 30, as discussed further below. The SEF 23 also generates client code 26 (e.g., Adobe Flex) for creating the client interface 31, and the database code 27 which facilitates interaction between the digital data processor 50 (discussed below) and the data store 60 (discussed below).
Illustrated digital data processor 30 comprises a personal computer, workstation, mainframe, or other digital data processing apparatus, as discussed above, and is used by a client to interface with stored data (e.g., RDF or otherwise). In the illustrated embodiment, the client 30 provides an interface 32 (e.g., graphical or otherwise) for interacting with data in the data store 60. By way of non-limiting example, the client 30 provides operations for creating, reading, updating and/or deleting data (CRUD) in the data store 60, although the client 30 may provide other operations, as well. In the illustrated embodiment, the interface 32 is generated from UI code 33 comprising the client code 26, HTML, and other web technologies known in the art, such as JavaScript, etc, although in other embodiments it may be otherwise.
The digital data processor 40 (or “UI server) comprises a personal computer, workstations, mainframe, server, or other digital data processing apparatus. In the illustrated embodiment, the digital data processor 40 generates the UI code 33 that displays the UI 32 on the client device 30. In the illustrated embodiment, the data processor 40 generates the code 33 from the model 25 and the client code 26, and comprises a combination of Adobe Flex code, and HTML, JavaScript, XML, etc., although it may also include other components instead of, or in addition to the aforementioned technologies (e.g., programming libraries, modules, etc.) Although in the illustrated embodiment, the data processor 40 generates the UI code 33, in other embodiments the data processor 20 may generate such code 33 itself, e.g., via the SEF 23, and the data processor 40 may only store and execute that code 33 without the model 25.
As discussed above, the digital data processor 40 executes in a network environment, e.g., in communications coupling with digital data processors 20-30 and 50 via the LAN/WAN 70. In the illustrated embodiment, the digital data processor 40 executes behind one or more firewalls 41 and 42 of the type conventionally known in the art of digital network security. The firewalls 41 and 42 themselves may comprise software executing on the digital data processor 40, or they may execute on dedicated appliances (e.g., one or more digital data processors). In any event, the firewalls 41 and 42 regulate traffic between and among the digital data processors 20-50, e.g., in order to prevent unauthorized access to the digital data processor 40. Thus, for example, the firewalls 41 and 42 may be configured by the analyst to permit, deny, encrypt, decrypt, or proxy network traffic between different security domains based upon a set of rules and/or other constraints (e.g., as defined in the model 25, or otherwise). Although firewalls are shown here, those skilled in the art will appreciate that systems according to the invention may employ a wide range of security measures of the type commonly known in the art of information security (e.g., physical security, authentication systems, anti-virus software, etc.), albeit as adapted in accord with the teachings hereof.
The illustrated digital data processor 50 (or “Database Server”) comprises a personal computer, workstation, mainframe, server, or other digital data processing apparatus, that executes a digital data information storage and retrieval application (e.g., a database management system). The data processor 40 stores, retrieves, updates, deletes, and otherwise interfaces with data maintained on networked attached storage device 60. In the illustrated embodiment, the data store 60 comprises a hard disk drive and/or other persistent storage device of the type known in the art. By way of non-limiting example, the storage device (or “data store”) 60 stores data (e.g., RDF or otherwise) for retrieval and display by the digital data processors 30 and 40.
By way of overview, the ontology 22 is defined with OWL, as mentioned above, a portion of which is shown here (22a). OWL uses an RDF/XML syntax to define a set of “classes” (e.g., “Person”) that each have assigned “properties” (e.g., “SSN”). However, those skilled in the art will appreciate that classes and properties are specific to an OWL implementation of the ontology 22, and in other embodiments, the ontology 22 may be implemented otherwise.
Also as discussed above, and again by way of overview, the constraints 24 are defined in XML, a portion of which is shown here (24a), although in other embodiments, the constraints may be defined otherwise. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the ontology 22a, constraints 24a, and display 100 illustrated here are shown only by way of example, and other embodiments may be implemented otherwise (e.g., without properties or classes), or without ontologies at all (e.g., the system may use another semantic definition structure).
Although not illustrated here, the SEF 23 may also define user roles (e.g., Supervisor, Analyst, etc.), and assign each role a selected “privilege” level. By way of non-limiting example, a Supervisor may have a higher privilege level than an Analyst. In the illustrated embodiment, user roles are often associated with constraints (e.g., security rules, field masking, etc.), as discussed further below. Thus, by way of non-limiting example, the SEF 23 may define a constraint that allows a Supervisor, but not an Analyst, to perform update operations.
As shown here, by way of example, the display 100 is divided into two regions (i.e., a top region and a bottom region). The top region includes a property field 110, label field 120, and type field 130. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the illustrated display 100 is shown merely by way of example, and other embodiments may use a different display (e.g., an undivided display, a display with three or more regions, etc.), or no display at all (e.g., an analyst may edit the model directly by hand-coding the constraints 22).
In the illustrated embodiment, the property field 110 displays the namespace and name of the selected property (e.g., “http:// . . . /#ssn,” as shown by way of non-limiting example) defined in the constraints 22a (e.g., via an analyst using the SEF UI 100). The label field 120 comprises a configurable field used to set the field name (e.g., “SSN,” as shown by way of non-limiting example) that will display on the client interface 32. The type field 130 is a configurable field (e.g., via a “drop down” selection box, as shown) that sets the data type of the field, e.g., “string” (as shown by way of non-limiting example), boolean, data, or float, just to name a few. In the illustrated embodiment the type field 130 is typically populated from the ontology 22, but it may also be manually set, e.g., by the analyst. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that fields 100-130 are shown by way of example, and in practice may include other fields, selection boxes, checkboxes and otherwise, e.g., as specified by the ontology 22, constraints 24, or otherwise.
The bottom region of display 100 provides configuration menus for defining the constraints 24. The display 100 includes a default factory menu 140, data processor menu 150, validator menu 160, and security rules menu 170, although in practice of the invention, a greater or lesser number of menus may be displayed. As shown in
Generally, masking is performed by entering into the UI 100 the number of characters that should be masked at the start and end of the selected field, and by selecting the role(s) that the mask should apply to. In the illustrated embodiment, a blank start and/or end values are assumed as zeroes, and a blank role entry will apply the mask to all roles, although in other embodiments it may be otherwise. Moreover, if a user's role matches multiple entries in the list of masks for a selected property, then the first mask in the list will be applied. In the illustrated embodiment, masking is based on the role of the user, and that the system will always mask according to the most restrictive role added, although in other embodiments this may vary.
Those skilled in the art will appreciate that in practice of the invention, other data processors may be defined instead of, or in addition to, the illustrated masking data processor, shown by way of non-limiting example.
By way of overview, as discussed above, a system executing in accord herewith stores and retrieves digital data (e.g., RDF or other semantic data) in accord with a model 25, or, more particularly, in accord with an ontology 21 (e.g., defined via the ontology editor 21) and a set of constraints 24 (e.g., defined via the SEF 23). This storing and retrieving of digital data can include, for example, creating, reading, updating and deleting (CRUD) data from a data store 60 via a Graphical User Interface (GUI) 32, or other User Interface (UI), e.g., command-line, etc.
Unlike other data storage and retrieval systems currently available in the prior art (e.g., in which developers APIs supplied with the systems to write “one-off” applications), the system of the illustrated embodiment allows a user 20 (e.g., developer, analyst, etc.) to create a model 25 that defines how user's (e.g., client 30) interact with data (e.g., RDF data in data store 60). Thus, for example, as client requirements change (e.g., increased security on UPDATE operations), the user may easily edit the model 25, rather than having the original developers either extensively modify the existing application, or write an entirely new application from scratch.
In step 410, the analyst executes the SEF 23 (e.g., on the digital data processor 20, or otherwise) to define user roles (e.g., Supervisor, Analyst, Administrator, etc.), security rules, validators, default values, field masking, and/or other constraints 24 (collectively, “constraints”) that are applied to data characterized by the ontology 22. In the illustrated embodiment, the constraints 24 are defined in XML, although in other embodiments it may be otherwise. The SEF 23 generates a semantic model 25 (or simply, “model”) by combining the ontology 22 and constraints 23 into a cohesive file (or set of files). Accordingly, in the illustrated embodiment, the model 25 is the “foundation” for providing CRUD capabilities to the client 30.
In step 420, the SEF 23 generates and transmits database code 27 to the database server 50. In the illustrated embodiment, the code 27 facilitates interaction between the database server 50 and the data store 60. In step 430, the SEF 23 generates and transmits the client code 26 (e.g., Adobe Flex) to the UI Server 40 for creating the client interface 31 displayed on the client device 30 (e.g., via a web browser), although in other embodiments, the code 26 may be transmitted directly to client device 30.
In the illustrated embodiment, as discussed above, the SEF 23 displays a user interface 100 for the analyst to customize and generate the model 25. More particularly, the analyst may add, remove, update, or otherwise define the constraints 24 via a set of graphical menus 110-170, and the SEF 23 generates code 24a corresponding to those constraints. As discussed above, those constraints 24 can include, for example, default values 140, field masking 150, validators 160, and security rules 170, just to name a few.
In step 440, the client device 30 sends a request to the UI server 40 for an interface 32 (e.g., a web page) for interacting with data in the data store 60. By way of non-limiting example, the client 30 may request a web page that provides form-Tillable fields and graphical buttons for performing CRUD operations, although the client 30 may request other interfaces, as well (e.g., a log-in screen, etc.). In the illustrated embodiment, the interface 32 is generated from UI code 33 comprising the client code 26, HTML, and other web technologies known in the art, such as JavaScript, etc, although in other embodiments it may be otherwise.
In step 450, the UI server 40 generates the UI code 33 that will display the UI 32 requested in step 440. In the illustrated embodiment, the UI server 40 generates the code 33 from the model 25 and the client code 26, and comprises a combination of Adobe Flex code, HTML, JavaScript, XML, etc., although it may also include other components instead of, or in addition to, the aforementioned technologies (e.g., programming libraries, modules, etc.). Although in the illustrated embodiment, the UI server 40 generates the UI code 33, in other embodiments the data processor 20 may generate such code 33 itself, e.g., via the SEF 23, and the UI server 40 may only store and execute that code 33.
In step 460, the UI server 40 sends the UI code 33 to the client 30 (e.g., via LAN/WAN 70), and the client 30 renders the user interface 32 (e.g., a web-fillable form with blank data fields) from that code 33. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that one or more firewalls 41 are employed to insure that the UI code 33, or other data, is not intercepted (e.g., by hackers, sniffers, etc.). Moreover, to further insure system security and integrity, in the illustrated embodiment only necessary code and data is sent to the client, e.g., as defined by the model 25, discussed above. Although not shown here, in other embodiments, the system may employ additional firewalls or other security measures commonly known in the art of information security, albeit as adapted in accord with the teaching hereof.
In step 470, the client sends a data identifier (e.g., a record identifier) to the UI server 40 for processing by the UI server 40 and/or database server 50, as discussed below. By way of non-limiting example, the data identifier may be a “Customer ID” that has data attributes (e.g., last name, date of birth, height, social security number, etc.) associated with fields of the interface 32. In step 480, the UI server 40 sends a transaction request to the database server 50 to retrieve data associated with the identifier from the data store 60. In step 490, the database server 50 processes the request of step 480 and retrieves the data from the store 60 (e.g., via SQL, SPARQL, etc.). In steps 500-510, the retrieved data is sent to the UI server 40 and then to the client 30 for display in the UI 32. See, for example,
In step 520, the client 30 inputs data and initiates a selected CRUD operation (e.g., via the user interface 32). For the purposes of this discussion, we will assume that the interface 32 looks similar to that illustrated in
In step 530, the client 30 performs a “client-side” validation on the data inputted in step 520. In the illustrated embodiment, client-side validations are executed by the UI code 33, and are defined in the client code 26, although in other embodiments they may be executed and/or defined otherwise (e.g., in the model 25). By way of non-limiting example, client-side validations can include, among others, the constraints discussed above (e.g., minimum string length, maximum string length, etc.), and if any validation fails, the user is warned, e.g., via a pop-up window displayed in the UI 32 or otherwise. Thus, for example, if the client code 26 required a validation that a social security number data value must have a minimum and maximum character length of nine characters, and the user failed to input a nine-character social security number data value, the user would be warned (see, e.g.,
In step 540, the inputted data (e.g., the social security number in this example), is sent to the UI server 40 (e.g., via LAN/WAN 70) for “server-side” validations (step 550). As discussed above, these validations are defined in the model 25 and executed by code generated therefrom by the UI server 40. They can include, for example, a check to insure that the social security number is a string containing exactly nine digits (e.g., in the event that such an error was not caught by the client-side validations in step 530). By way of further example, if the inputted data does fail this validation, or any other validations (e.g., as defined by the model 25 or otherwise), the UI server 40 may generate a server-side exception which can, for example, terminate the current transaction, or it can be sent to the client 30 in the form of a graphical warning (see step 560).
In step 560, a warning is sent from the UI server 40 to the client 30 if an exception (or other type of error) is thrown or detected in the validation step 550. By way of non-limiting example, such an error can be generated as a result of an inputted social security number that is not exactly nine digits in length (e.g., as described above in step 530), or as otherwise required by the model 25. In the illustrated embodiment, the warning can be a pop-up window (e.g., of the type shown in
In step 590, the validated data (e.g., the new social security number data value) is sent to the database server 50 for processing (e.g., via a LAN/WAN connection, cabled connection, etc.). In step 600, the database server 50 processes the transaction, e.g., associates the inputted data value with the social security number attribute of the data identifier (e.g., Customer ID “555555”) in the data store 60. This can be accomplished by a variety of techniques pursuant to the data format of the store 60. Thus, for example, SPARQL may be used for an RDF data store, SQL for a relational database, and so forth. In this example, the code (whether SPARQL, SQL, etc.) for associating the inputted data value with the social security number attribute of the specified data identifier (e.g., Customer ID “555555”) comprises the code 27 generated by the SEF 23 (as discussed above and shown in
In step 610, the database server 50 returns the result of the processed transaction (e.g., completed, failed, etc.) and the processed data (e.g., a confirmed created data value, a confirmed updated data value, etc.) to the UI server 50. In the illustrated embodiment, failed transactions generate a warning by the database server 50 or UI server 40 (e.g., as described in step 560) that can be sent to the client 30, administrator, other user, etc.
In step 620, the data (e.g., social security number) is sent to the client 30 for display in the UI 32, subject to any constraints defined by the model 25. Thus, as shown here by way of non-limiting example, a masking constraint may be applied to the social security number data value before it is sent to the client 30 for display in the UI 32. In the illustrated embodiment, masking will hide a selected portion of the data value (or the entire data value) on the UI server 40 (i.e., “server-side” masking), and the full data value (e.g., social security number) will never be sent to the client 30 or be displayed in the UI 32. Rather, the UI server 40 will replace selected portions (e.g., one or more characters) of the data value with mask values for display in the UI 32 (e.g., an asterisk for each of the masked characters in the data value). See, e.g.,
Described above are methods and apparatus meeting the desired objectives. Those skilled in the art will appreciate that the embodiments herein are merely examples of the invention and that other embodiments incorporating changes therein fall within the scope of the invention, of which we claim:
This application claims the benefit of priority of U.S. Patent Application Ser. No. 61/104,211 filed Oct. 9, 2008, having the same title hereof, the teachings of which are incorporated herein by reference.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
4701130 | Whitney et al. | Oct 1987 | A |
4895518 | Arnold et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
4953106 | Gansner et al. | Aug 1990 | A |
5119465 | Jack et al. | Jun 1992 | A |
5129043 | Yue | Jul 1992 | A |
5199068 | Cox | Mar 1993 | A |
5259766 | Sack et al. | Nov 1993 | A |
5267865 | Lee et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5270920 | Pearse et al. | Dec 1993 | A |
5301270 | Steinberg et al. | Apr 1994 | A |
5310349 | Daniels et al. | May 1994 | A |
5311422 | Loftin et al. | May 1994 | A |
5326270 | Ostby et al. | Jul 1994 | A |
5333254 | Robertson | Jul 1994 | A |
5339390 | Robertson et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5374932 | Wyschogrod et al. | Dec 1994 | A |
5379387 | Carlstedt et al. | Jan 1995 | A |
5381332 | Wood | Jan 1995 | A |
5395243 | Lubin et al. | Mar 1995 | A |
5421730 | Lasker, III et al. | Jun 1995 | A |
5450480 | Man et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5463682 | Fisher et al. | Oct 1995 | A |
5499293 | Behram et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5519618 | Kastner et al. | May 1996 | A |
5548506 | Srinivasan | Aug 1996 | A |
5579486 | Oprescu et al. | Nov 1996 | A |
5597312 | Bloom et al. | Jan 1997 | A |
5608789 | Fisher et al. | Mar 1997 | A |
5634053 | Noble et al. | May 1997 | A |
5655118 | Heindel et al. | Aug 1997 | A |
5732192 | Malin et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5745753 | Mosher, Jr. | Apr 1998 | A |
5761063 | Jannette et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5765140 | Knudson et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5788504 | Rice et al. | Aug 1998 | A |
5795155 | Morrel-Samuels | Aug 1998 | A |
5809212 | Shasha | Sep 1998 | A |
5822780 | Schutzman | Oct 1998 | A |
5826077 | Blakeley et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5826252 | Wolters, Jr. et al. | Oct 1998 | A |
5829983 | Koyama et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5832483 | Barker | Nov 1998 | A |
5841673 | Kobayashi et al. | Nov 1998 | A |
5873076 | Barr et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5875441 | Nakatsuyama et al. | Feb 1999 | A |
5881269 | Dobbelstein | Mar 1999 | A |
5907837 | Ferrel et al. | May 1999 | A |
5935249 | Stern et al. | Aug 1999 | A |
5974441 | Rogers et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
5974443 | Jeske | Oct 1999 | A |
5983267 | Shklar et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5987415 | Breese et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5995958 | Xu | Nov 1999 | A |
6012098 | Bayeh et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6035412 | Tamer et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6044373 | Gladney et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6044466 | Anand et al. | Mar 2000 | A |
6078982 | Du et al. | Jun 2000 | A |
6085188 | Bachmann et al. | Jul 2000 | A |
6094652 | Faisal | Jul 2000 | A |
6122632 | Botts et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6125363 | Buzzeo et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6130679 | Chen et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6137797 | Bass et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6144997 | Lamming et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6151595 | Pirolli et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6151624 | Teare et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6154738 | Call | Nov 2000 | A |
6177932 | Galdes et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6182085 | Eichstaedt et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6185516 | Hardin et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6185534 | Breese et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6212502 | Ball et al. | Apr 2001 | B1 |
6240417 | Eastwick et al. | May 2001 | B1 |
6243713 | Nelson et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6246320 | Monroe | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6266668 | Vanderveldt et al. | Jul 2001 | B1 |
6308163 | Du et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6330554 | Altschuler et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6341277 | Coden et al. | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6360330 | Mutalik et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6369819 | Pitkow et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6380910 | Moustakas et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6381738 | Choi et al. | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6389429 | Kane et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6389460 | Stewart et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6393423 | Goedken | May 2002 | B1 |
6396885 | Ding et al. | May 2002 | B1 |
6405211 | Sokol et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6405251 | Bullard et al. | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6415283 | Conklin | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6418413 | DeMarcken et al. | Jul 2002 | B2 |
6418448 | Sarkar | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6426723 | Smith et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6427151 | Chan et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6429870 | Chen et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6437799 | Shinomi et al. | Aug 2002 | B1 |
6446200 | Ball et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6446256 | Hyman et al. | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6463440 | Hind et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6473467 | Wallace et al. | Oct 2002 | B1 |
6493331 | Walton et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6493399 | Xia et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6496833 | Goldberg et al. | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6509898 | Chi et al. | Jan 2003 | B2 |
6529899 | Kraft et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6530079 | Choi et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6539374 | Jung | Mar 2003 | B2 |
6542912 | Meltzer et al. | Apr 2003 | B2 |
6546406 | DeRose et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6556983 | Altschuler et al. | Apr 2003 | B1 |
6571222 | Matsumoto et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6577769 | Kenyon et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6583800 | Ridgley et al. | Jun 2003 | B1 |
6594662 | Sieffert et al. | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6598043 | Baclawski | Jul 2003 | B1 |
6606613 | Altschuler et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6625657 | Bullard | Sep 2003 | B1 |
6636848 | Aridor et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6640284 | Shaw et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6643638 | Xu | Nov 2003 | B1 |
6643652 | Helgeson et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6678679 | Bradford | Jan 2004 | B1 |
6701314 | Conover et al. | Mar 2004 | B1 |
6721747 | Lipkin | Apr 2004 | B2 |
6725227 | Li | Apr 2004 | B1 |
6751663 | Farrell et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6754475 | Harrison et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6757708 | Craig et al. | Jun 2004 | B1 |
6771706 | Ling et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6772148 | Baclawski | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6778971 | Altschuler et al. | Aug 2004 | B1 |
6785341 | Walton et al. | Aug 2004 | B2 |
6792420 | Stephen Chen et al. | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6804688 | Kobayashi et al. | Oct 2004 | B2 |
6856992 | Britton et al. | Feb 2005 | B2 |
6901438 | Davis et al. | May 2005 | B1 |
6925457 | Britton et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6927728 | Vook et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6934702 | Faybishenko et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
6940917 | Menon et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
6954749 | Greenblatt et al. | Oct 2005 | B2 |
6963875 | Moore et al. | Nov 2005 | B2 |
7027055 | Anderson | Apr 2006 | B2 |
7047411 | DeMello et al. | May 2006 | B1 |
7058367 | Luo et al. | Jun 2006 | B1 |
7058637 | Britton et al. | Jun 2006 | B2 |
7117260 | Bimson et al. | Oct 2006 | B2 |
7171145 | Takeuchi et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7171415 | Kan et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7289793 | Norwood et al. | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7302440 | Britton et al. | Nov 2007 | B2 |
7313588 | Shotton, Jr. et al. | Dec 2007 | B1 |
7318055 | Britton et al. | Jan 2008 | B2 |
7505989 | Gardner | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7613712 | Greenblatt et al. | Nov 2009 | B2 |
7640239 | Britton et al. | Dec 2009 | B2 |
7676489 | Kaiser | Mar 2010 | B2 |
7716056 | Weng | May 2010 | B2 |
8112416 | Liu | Feb 2012 | B2 |
8335778 | Ghosh | Dec 2012 | B2 |
8392483 | Lawrence | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8612208 | Cooper | Dec 2013 | B2 |
8768923 | Drumm | Jul 2014 | B2 |
9092522 | Altenhofen | Jul 2015 | B2 |
9298855 | Aggarwal | Mar 2016 | B2 |
20010047355 | Anwar | Nov 2001 | A1 |
20020042831 | Capone et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020049603 | Mehra et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020049788 | Lipkin et al. | Apr 2002 | A1 |
20020059566 | Delcambre et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020069134 | Solomon | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020078030 | Iwayama et al. | Jun 2002 | A1 |
20020091678 | Miller et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020091710 | Dunham et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020091835 | Lentini et al. | Jul 2002 | A1 |
20020118688 | Jagannathan | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020120598 | Shadmon et al. | Aug 2002 | A1 |
20020133502 | Rosenthal et al. | Sep 2002 | A1 |
20020143759 | Yu | Oct 2002 | A1 |
20020177232 | Melker et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20020178232 | Ferguson | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20030004934 | Qian | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030009239 | Lombardo et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030014399 | Hansen et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030037145 | Fagan | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030050834 | Caplan | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030050927 | Hussam | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030050929 | Bookman et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030061209 | Raboczi et al. | Mar 2003 | A1 |
20030074352 | Raboczi et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030074369 | Scheutze et al. | Apr 2003 | A1 |
20030088639 | Lentini et al. | May 2003 | A1 |
20030109951 | Hsiung et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030182310 | Charnock | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030208499 | Bigwood et al. | Nov 2003 | A1 |
20030229529 | Mui et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20040034651 | Gupta et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040054690 | Hillerbrand et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20050027563 | Fackler et al. | Feb 2005 | A1 |
20050055330 | Britton et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050060372 | DeBettencourt et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050125683 | Matsuyama et al. | Jun 2005 | A1 |
20060036620 | Bigwood et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060053135 | Beaumont | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060218123 | Chowdhuri | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060271563 | Angelo et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20060277227 | Britton et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20070078815 | Weng | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20070081197 | Omoigui | Apr 2007 | A1 |
20080109420 | Britton et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080109485 | Britton et al. | May 2008 | A1 |
20080195591 | Lei | Aug 2008 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1132847 | Sep 2001 | EP |
2343763 | May 2000 | GB |
WO-9722096 | Jun 1997 | WO |
WO-9805018 | Feb 1998 | WO |
WO-9810399 | Mar 1998 | WO |
WO-9824020 | Jun 1998 | WO |
WO-9927460 | Jun 1999 | WO |
Entry |
---|
“An Overview of the NEDSS Initiative”, website for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/nedss/About/overview.html, printed Nov. 14, 2005, 2 pages. |
“Background on Public Health Surveillance”, website for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/nedss/About/purpose.htm, printed Nov. 14, 2005, 3 pages. |
“Description of the NEDSS Base System,” Mar. 28, 2001, 5 pages. |
“Inkling: RDF Query Using SquishQL,” downloaded from http://swordfish.rdfweb.org/rdfquery/ on Mar. 20, 2003, 2 pages. |
“MaestroTM Public Health Suite,” Orion International website, http://www.orionhealth.com/maestro_overview.htm, printed Jan. 18, 2005, 3 pages. |
“National Electronic Disease Surveillance System (NEDSS): A standards-Based Approach to Connect: Public Health and Clinical Medicine”, J. Public Health Management Practice, 2001. 7(6], 43-508 pages. |
“NEDSS and NEDSS PAMs Business Discovery Statement”, Version 1.2, Mar. 9, 2002, 23 pages. |
“NEDSS Base System Fact Sheet”, website for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2 pages, Apr. 25, 2001. |
“Nedss Logical Data Model (NLDM) Overview and Users' Guide”, Version 1.0, 92 pages, Feb. 13, 2002. |
“NEDSS Systems Architecture”, Version 2.0, Apr. 15, 2001, 5 pages. |
“Overview of PHIN”, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention website, http://www.cdc.gov/phin, printed Jan. 18, 2005, 3 pages. |
“rdfDB Query Language,” downloaded from http://www.guha.com/rdfdb/query.html on Mar. 20, 2003, 4 pages. |
“RDQL—RDF Data Query Language,” Hewlett-Packard Company, .COPYRGT. 1994-2003, downloaded from http://www.hpl.hp.com/semweb/rdql.htm on Mar. 20, 2003, 3 pages. |
“The Rete Algorithm,” http://herzberg.ca.sandia.gov/jess/docs/52/rete.html, 3 pages, downloaded on Feb. 20, 2003. |
“The Surveillance and Monitoring Component of the Public Health Information Network”, website for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/nedss, printed Nov. 14, 2005, 2 pages. |
Public Health Information Network, The Association of State and Territorial Health Officials website, http://www.astho.org/?template=public_health_info_network.html, printed Jan. 18, 2005, 2 pages. |
Amann, B. et al., “Integrating Ontologies and Thesauri for RDF Schema Creation and Metadata Querying” Mar. 6, 2001. |
Beckett, D. “The Design and Implementation of the Redland RDF Application Framework,” Copyright WWW01 May 2-5, 2001. Retrieved from http:www10.org/cdrom/papers/490/. |
Beckett, Dave Dave Beckett's Resource Description Framework (RDF) Resource Guide, available at http://planetrdf.com/guide, last updated Sep. 23, 2005, 26 pages. |
Berners-Lee et al “Web Architecture: Describing and Exchanging Data,” W3C Recommendations, Jun. 7, 1999, http://www.w3.org/1999/06/07-WebData. |
Berners-Lee, “Semantic Web Road Map,” W3C Recommendations, Sep. 1998, http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Semantic.html. |
Berners-Lee, “What a semantic web can represent,” W3C Recommendations, Sep. 1998. |
Berners-Lee, Tim “Information Management: A Proposal,” Mar. 1989, May 1990; 14 pages. |
Berniers-Lee et al, “The Enquire Manual,” Oct. 1980, http://infomesh.net/2001/enriquire/manual/. |
Berniers-Lee et al. RFC 2396: Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax (Aug. 1998) http://www.cs.tut.fi/.about.jkorpela/rfc/2396/full.html, 23 pages, downloaded on Feb. 20, 2003. |
Bonifati, “Comparative Analysis of Five XML Query Languages,” SIGMOD Record, vol. 29, No. 1, Mar. 2000. |
Bray, Tim et al. “Extensible Markup Language,” W3C Recommendations, Feb. 10, 1998, http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210. |
Brickley, Dan “RDF Query in Javascript demo,” W3C website, Jul. 28, 2001, http://www.w3.org/1999/11/11-WWWProposal/rdfqdemo.html. |
Brickley, Dan “Semantic Web History: Nodes and Arcs 1989-1999,” The WWW Proposal and RDF, revised Mar. 2001 http:www.w3.org/1999/11/11-WWWProposal/. |
Brickley, Dan et al. “SWIPE 0.1 specification” Pub. 2001. Retrieved from: http:rdfweb.org/2001/01/swipe/. |
Brickley, Dan et al., “RDF, squish etc.” Pub on the web Nov. 26, 2000. Retrieved from http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/discovery/2000/111/QL/QL.txt. |
Bucher, Alex et al. “Discovering Internet Marketing Intelligence through Online Analytical Web Usage Mining,” SIGMOD Record, vol. 27, No. 4, Dec. 1998. |
Buneman et al “Interaction between Path and Type Constraints” PODS 1999, pp. 56-67. |
Card et al., “Readings in Information Visualizing Using Vision to Think”, 1999, Morgan Kaufmann, p. 298. |
Carr, Leslie et al. “The Evolution of Hypertext Link Services,” ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 31, No. 4es, Dec. 1999. |
Chen, James et al “A Distributed Multi-Agent System for Collaborative Information Management and Sharing,” RBAC 2000, Berlin, Germany ISBN 1-58113-259-x/00/07; 2000. |
Churchill, R. et al. “RDT Technical Overview” Mozilla.org. Last modified 11, 1999. Retrieved from http://www.mozill.org/rdf/doc/api.html. |
Clark, James Editor “XSL Transformations,” W3C Recommendations, Nov. 16, 1999, http://www.w3.org/TR/xsIt. |
Cowan, John et al. “XML Information Set,” W3C Recommendations, May 17, 1999, http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/WD-xml-infoset-19990517. |
Crestani, Fabio “Vocal Access to a Newspaper Archive: Design Issues and Preliminary Investigations,” International Computer Science Institute; Mar. 1999. |
Dublin Core Metadata Initiative, available at http://dublincore.org, web page last updated Mar. 31 2009, copyright 1995-2009; 1 page. |
Extensible Markup Language (XML), W3C Sematic Web, http://www.w3.org/XML/ ; last updated Apr. 5, 2009; copyright 1996-2003; 5 pages. |
Extensible Markup Language Activity Statement , W3C Ubiquitous Web, http://www.w3.org/XML/Activity; downloaded Apr. 10, 2009; 3 pages. |
Fan, Wenfei, “Integrity Constraints for XML,” ACM Symposium on Principles of Database Systems archive Proceedings of the nineteenth ACM SIGMOD-SIGACT-SIGART symposium on Principles of database systems; Dallas, Texas, United States; pp. 23-34 ; Year of Publication: 2000. |
Fensel, D. “Ontobroker: Or How to Enable Intelligent Access to the WWW,” Proceedings of the 11th Banff Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based System Workshop (KAW98), Banaff, Kanada, Apr. 1998. |
Forgy, Charles L. “Rete: A Fast Algorithm for the Many Pattern/Many Object Pattern Match Problem,” Artifical Intelligence vol. 19 (1982) pp. 17-37. |
Frank Manola, “Towards a Richer Object Model”, SIGMOD Record, vol. 27, No. 1, Mar. 1998, 6 pages. |
Gandon, Fabien et al. “A Multi-Agent System to Support Exploiting an XML-based Corporate Memory” INRIA, ACACI Project, 2004 Route des Lucioles, 06902 Sophia Antipolis, France, Proc. of the Third Int. Conf. On Practical Aspects of Knowledge Management (PAKM2000) Basel, Swwitzerland, Oct. 30-31, 2000, (U.Reimer, ed.). |
Grant, J and Beckett, D. “RDF Test Cases,” W3C Recommendations, Dec. 2003, http://www.w3.org/TR/2003/PR-rdf-testcases-20031215/. |
Gray, M., “Semantic Labeling” HIVE. May 14, 1999. Retrieved from: htttp://hive.sourceforge.net/mkgray-thesis/html/node8.html. |
Halpin, Harry et al “W3C Semantic Web Activity,” W3C Sematic Web, http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/; last updated Apr. 6, 2009, copyright 1994-2009. |
Hayes, Patrick Editor “RDF Semantic,” W3C Recommendation, Feb. 2004, http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/. |
Jenkins, C. et al., “Automatic RDF Metadata Generation for Resource,” Computer Networks, 1999. |
Karvounarakis, G. et al., “Querying Community Web Portals” Pub. 2000. |
Kerschberg, L. “Knowledge Management in Heterogenous Data Warehouse Environments,” Pub. 2001. |
Kerstin Forsberg et al. Extensible use of RDF in a business context. Computer Networks 33 (2000), pp. 347-364: The International Journal of Computer and Telecommunications Networking . Published Jun. 2000. |
Lassila, et al “Resource Description Framework (RDF) Model and Syntax Specification,” W3C Recommendations, Feb. 22, 1999. |
Lois Delcambre et al., “Bundles in Captivity: An Application of Superimposed Information”, IEEE 2001, pp. 111-120. |
Ludascher, B. Gupta, A. Martone, M.E.Model-based mediation with domain maps. Data Engineering, 2001. Proceedings. 17th International Conference on Publication Date: 2001. pp. 81-90. Meeting Date: Apr. 2-6, 2001. |
M. R. Kogalovsky. Systematization of information resources collections in digital libraries. MAIK Nauka/Interperiodica distributed exclusively by Springer Science+Business Media LLC. vol. 26, No. 3 / May 2000, pp. 140-155. |
Malhotra, Ashok et al., “XML Schema Requirements,” W3C Note, Feb. 15, 1999, http://www.w3.org/TR/NOTE-xml-schema-req. |
Manola, Frank Editor “RDF Primer,” W3C Working Draft, Mar. 2002, http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/WD-rdf-primer-20020319/. |
McGrath et al, “Digital Library Technology for Locating and Accessing Scientific Data,” Internationalal Conference on Digital Libraries, Proceedings of the fourth ACM conference on Digital Libraries, Berkley, CA, United States, pp. 188-194, Year of Publication: 1999. ISBN: 1-58113-145-3. |
Melnik, Sergey “Building a Distributed Full-Text Index of the Web,” WWW10, May 1-5, 2001, Hong Kong ACM 1-58113-348-0/01/00005. |
Melnik, Sergey “A Mediation Infrastructure for Digital Library Services,” Digital Libraries, San Antonio, TX ACM 2000-581 13-231 x/00/0006; 2000. |
Melnik, Sergey, “Storing RDF in a relational database,” http://www-db.stanford.edu/ .about.melnik/rdf/db.html, 5 pages, downloaded on 20/20/2003. |
Miller, Eric et al., RDF Primer, W3C @@ Editor's Draft Jan. 27, 2002 @@, Copyright 2001, 2002 (MIT,INRIA,Keio) (22 pages). |
Miller, L., “Aggregating Recommendations Using RDF,” ILRT. Org. Pub. Jan. 10, 1999. |
Ouksel, Aris et al. “Semantic Interoperability in Global Information Systems,” SIGMOD Record, vol. 28, No. 1, Mar. 1999. |
Prudhommeaux, Eric “Check and Visualize you RDF,” W3C website, Feb. 15, 2007, http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/. |
Public Health Information Network Functions and Specifications, Version 1.2—Dec. 18, 2002; Draft; 56 pages. |
Published International Search Report (published May 24, 2007) and Written Opinion (dated Feb. 12, 2007) for PCT/US05/005725. |
Quinlan, J. R., “Induction of Decision Trees,” Machine Learning vol. 1 (1986) pp. 18-106. |
RDF Interest Group 1999-2004, available at W3C Semantic Web, http://www.w3.org/RDF/Interest/ ; last updated Dec. 8, 2005; downloaded Apr. 2009. |
Resource Description Framework (RDF) Model and Syntax Specification W3C Recommendation (Feb. 22, 1999) http://www.w3.org.TR/1999/REC-rdf-syntax-19990222/, 34 pages, downloaded on Feb. 20, 2003. |
Resource Description Framework, (RDF) Schema Specification, W3C Proposed Recommendation Mar. 3, 1999, http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/PR-rdf-schema-19990303/. |
Rogers, N. “SWAD—Europe deliverable 4.2: Semantic Web and Web Services: RDF/XML and Soap for Web Data Encoding” Year 2001. |
S. Alexaki et al. Managing RDF Metadata for Community Webs. Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. vol. 1921/2000, pp. 140-151. |
Semantic Web Workshop 2001. Proceedings of the Second International Workshop on the Semantic Web. SemWeb'2001. S. Staab et al. Hong Kong, China, May 2001. |
Semantic Web Workshop: Models, Architectures and Management, Sep. 21, 2000 Conference Review, Intelligence Summer 2001. |
Sergey Melnik et al. Representing Order in RDF. Pub. Jan. 7, 2001. Retrieved from:http://infolab.stanfordedu/˜stefan/daml/order.html. |
Shankar, Ravi D. et al., “Epoch: an Ontological Framework to Support Clinical Trials Management”, 1Stanford Medical Informatics, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, CA, USA, 2The Immune Tolerance Network, Pittsburgh, PA, USA, pp. 25-32, Nov. 11, 2006, Copyright 2006. |
Six, Janet, M. et al, “Effective e Graph Visualization Via Node Grouping”, Proceedings of the IEEE Symposium on Information Visualization 2001 (INFOVIS'01) (8 pages). |
Suciu, Dan “Managing Web Data,” AT&T Labs-Research, SIGMOD 1999, ISSN:0163-5808. |
Swick, R. “The Cambridge Communique,” W3C Recommendations, Oct. 1999, http://www.w3.org/TR/schema-arch. |
Swick, Ralph, “RDF:Weaving the Web of Discovery,” Putting it Together, Jun. 1999, pp. 21-25, Year of Publication: 1999, ISSN:1091-3556. |
Sycara, Katia et al. “Dynamic Service Matchmaking Among Agents in Open Information,” SIGMOD Record, vol. 28, No. 1, Mar. 1999. |
Takeda, Koichi, “Site Outlining,” IBM Research, Tokyo Research Lab, 1623-14, May 1998. |
Technical Reports and Communications, W3C website, http://www.w3.org/TR/ ; last updated Apr. 21, 2009; copyrighted 1994-2006. |
Terence Critchlow. Report on XEWA-00: the XML enabled wide-area searches for bioinformatics workshop. ACM> vol. 30 , Issue 1 (Mar. 2001). |
Thomas Lee, et al “Information integration with attribution support for corporate profiles,” Information integration with attribution support for corporate profiles, Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings of the eighth international conference on Information and knowledge management , Kansas City, Missouri, United States ,pp. 423-429 ,Year of Publication: 1999 , ISBN:1-58113-146-1. |
Thompson, Craig “Workshop on Compositional Software Architectures Workshop Report,” Software Engineering Notes, vol. 23. No. 3, May 1998. |
Tudhope et al “Semantically Indexed Hypermedia: Linking Information Disciplines,” ACM 2000, www.comp.glam.ac.uk/people/staff/dstudhope. |
Web site; http://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/RDFnot.html ; Sep. 27, 2004 ; 8 pages. |
William A. Yasnoff et al., “Public health informatics: Improving and transforming public health in the information age” Topics in Health Information Management, Frederick; Aspen Publishers; Feb. 2001; 8 pages. |
Supplementary European Search Report for App. No. 03728486.6, dated Aug. 21, 2007. |
Sergey Melnik and Stefan Decker, “A Layered Approach to Information Modeling and Interoperability on the Web”, Database Group, Stanford Univ., Sep. 4, 2000, 13 pages. |
Dan Brickley and Libby Miller, “RDF, SQL and the Semantic Web—A Case Study”, www.ilrt.org/discovery/2000/10/swsql/ , latest version Nov. 8, 2000 (initial draft Oct. 31, 2000), 8 pages. |
Omelayenko, B., “Learning of Ontologies for the Web: the Analysis of Existent Approaches” Proceedings of the International Workshop on Web Dynamics Held in Conj. With The 8TH Internationsl Conference on Database Theory Jan. 3, 2001 pp. 1-10, XP002378744, London, UK. |
Nick, Z.Z. et al., “Web Search Using a Genetic Algorithm” IEEE Internet Computing, vol. 5, No. 2, Mar. 2001, pp. 18-26, XP002378745, USA. |
Supplemental European Search Report for European Application No. 02736950.3 dated May 19, 2006, 4 pages. |
European Patent Office Communication Pursuant to Article 96(2) for European Applicaiton No. 02741744.2, dated Dec. 8, 2006, 12 pages. |
International Search Report for International Appliaction No. PCT/US05/05725, dated Feb. 12, 2007, (9 pages). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20100094805 A1 | Apr 2010 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61104211 | Oct 2008 | US |