U.S. patent application number 10/170833 was filed with the patent office on 2003-09-04 for method and apparatus for group action processing between users of a collaboration system.
Invention is credited to Buchheim, Dennis, Hagan, Thomas, Smiga, Brian, Storkel, Norman Scott, Wadhwani, David.
Application Number | 20030167279 10/170833 |
Document ID | / |
Family ID | 25173618 |
Filed Date | 2003-09-04 |
United States Patent
Application |
20030167279 |
Kind Code |
A1 |
Smiga, Brian ; et
al. |
September 4, 2003 |
Method and apparatus for group action processing between users of a
collaboration system
Abstract
A natural language-based information organization and
collaboration tool for a computer system is disclosed. The present
invention includes an apparatus and method for processing text
expressions in a computer system, the apparatus including: 1) an
object database defining an information object with an associated
keyword; 2) a user input device for receiving an input text
expression; 3) a parsing device for identifying the keyword in the
input text expression, the parsing device including functions for
linking the input text expression to the information object based
on the keyword identified in the input text expression; and 4) a
user output device for displaying to the user the identity of the
information object to which the input text expression was linked.
The apparatus of the present invention further includes
supplemental information in the object database which is related to
the information object, the user output device further including
functions for displaying the supplemental information when a
corresponding keyword is identified in the input text expression.
The apparatus of the present invention further includes a method
and apparatus for collaboration between users of a time and project
management system.
Inventors: |
Smiga, Brian; (San
Francisco, CA) ; Buchheim, Dennis; (Palo Alto,
CA) ; Hagan, Thomas; (Boston, MA) ; Wadhwani,
David; (San Francisco, CA) ; Storkel, Norman
Scott; (Palo Alto, CA) |
Correspondence
Address: |
Judith Z. Szepesi
BLAKELY, SOKOLOFF, TAYLOR & ZAFMAN LLP
Seventh Floor
12400 Wilshire Boulevard
Los Angeles
CA
90025-1026
US
|
Family ID: |
25173618 |
Appl. No.: |
10/170833 |
Filed: |
June 11, 2002 |
Related U.S. Patent Documents
|
|
|
|
|
|
Application
Number |
Filing Date |
Patent Number |
|
|
10170833 |
Jun 11, 2002 |
|
|
|
09421921 |
Oct 20, 1999 |
|
|
|
6421678 |
|
|
|
|
09421921 |
Oct 20, 1999 |
|
|
|
08798522 |
Feb 10, 1997 |
|
|
|
6029171 |
|
|
|
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
1/1 ;
707/999.102 |
Current CPC
Class: |
Y10S 707/967 20130101;
Y10S 707/951 20130101; Y10S 707/99933 20130101; G06Q 10/10
20130101; Y10S 707/99932 20130101; Y10S 707/99943 20130101; Y10S
707/99944 20130101 |
Class at
Publication: |
707/102 |
International
Class: |
G06F 017/00 |
Claims
1. A method of collaborating on projects, using a first instance of
a messaging system and a second instance of the messaging system,
the method comprising the computer implemented steps of: permitting
entry of a message in the first instance of the messaging system;
parsing the message to determine keywords; creating a header for
the message based on the keywords; sending the message, using the
header, to the second instance of the messaging system.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: filing a copy of the
message in the first instance of the messaging system.
3. The method of claim 1, further comprising: receiving the message
at the second instance of the messaging system; displaying a
selection of reply options; generating a reply, including an
automatic reply content based on the selection; creating a reply
header for the reply based on the message content; and sending the
reply, using the reply header, to the first instance of the
messaging system.
4. The method of claim 3, further comprising: filing a copy of the
message and the reply in the second instance of the messaging
system.
5. The method of claim 3, wherein the selection of reply options
include an affirmative, a negative, and an other.
6. The method of claim 5, further comprising: entering an entry
into a first calendar and a first list based on the message in the
first instance of the messaging system.
7. The method of claim 6, further comprising: entering an entry
into a second calendar and a second list based on the message, in
the second instance of the messaging system.
8. The method of claim 6 wherein said entry is entered in a
pencil.
9. The method of claim 7 wherein said entry is entered in a
pencil.
10. The method of claim 7, further comprising: continuing a
collaboration when the selection is the other, until the selection
is the affirmative or the negative; completing the collaboration
when the reply option is the affirmative; and aborting the
collaboration when the reply option is the negative.
11. The method of claim 10, wherein the step of aborting the
collaboration comprises: deleting the entry in the first calendar
and the first list in the first instance of the messaging system;
and deleting the entry in the second calendar and the second list
in the second instance of the messaging system.
12. The method of claim 10 wherein said step of completing the
collaboration comprises: updating the entry in the first calendar
and the first list based on the reply from the second instance of
the messaging system; and updating the entry in the second calendar
and the second list based on the reply.
13. The method of claim 12, wherein said step of updating comprises
entering said entry using a pen.
14. The method of claim 13 wherein using the pen indicates using a
different color from using the pencil.
15. The method of claim 10 wherein said step of continuing the
collaboration comprises continuing a negotiation cycle, the
negotiation cycle comprising: receiving the reply with the reply
option of the other; displaying the selection of the reply options;
generating a new reply, including a new automatic reply content
based on the selection; creating a new header; and sending the new
reply, using the new header.
16. The method of claim 15, further comprising the steps of:
determining whether the new reply is the affirmative, the negative,
or the other; executing another negotiation cycle if the reply is
the other; and ending the collaboration if the reply is the
affirmative or the negative.
17. The method of claim 1, wherein said first instance and said
second instance of said messaging system are implemented on a
peer-to-peer distributed system.
18. The method of claim 17, wherein said peer-to-peer distributed
system comprises using a network to connect a plurality of computer
systems.
19. A method of group action processing in a peer-to-peer
collaboration system, comprising the computer implemented steps of:
enabling entry of a message content; parsing said message content;
determining a delegate for the message based on the message
content; sending the message to the delegate.
Description
FIELD OF THE INVENTION
[0001] The present invention relates to the organization and access
to information stored in a computer system. More specifically, the
present invention relates to the analysis of natural language input
to produce structured information output and the processing of
notes in a computer system. The present invention also relates to
time and action/project management using a computer system. More
specifically, the present invention relates to a method and
apparatus for collaboration between two or more persons for time
and project management.
DESCRIPTION OF RELATED ART
[0002] Many application programs exist in the prior art for
organizing information in particular ways or for manipulating
specific types of information. For example, word processing
applications are specifically designed for manipulating text
documents in a computer system. Similarly databases in the prior
art provide means for structuring data in well defined ways.
Further, calendaring systems provide a structured way for tracking
events or actions required at specified dates and times. Although
these prior art applications provide ways for organizing
information in particular ways, it is often inconvenient to require
a user to switch back and forth between application programs when
updates of information are required. Moreover, these type of
systems require a user to organize the information prior to
entering data into the computer system. For example, the user must
know to activate a calendaring program if an appointment or action
date is to be entered. In separate actions, the user may also need
to update lists or databases associated with the appointment or
action for which a calendar entry was made. In many prior art
systems, the user is required to spend time navigating around a
user interface to link information to the desired lists or
categories to which it pertains.
[0003] U.S. Pat. No. 5,115,504 entitled "Information Management
System" describes a system for linking elements representing stored
information in a database. The system comprises a link structure
formed in a section of the database independent of the elements, a
pointer in the link structure indicating the location of a first
element, and a second pointer in the link structure indicating the
location of a second element. The database contains items
comprising textual data and a plurality of categories into which
the items may be categorized such that each item may be linked to
more than one category. The system automatically assigns an element
in a database to a parent category if it has been assigned to a
child category of the parent. The system also generally features a
means for assigning an element in a database to one or more of a
plurality of categories, the categories being is hierarchically
arranged. The system constructs views as screens of information
organized into sections having categories and section heads and
items presented one after another beneath a given section head of a
category to which the item has been assigned. After entering an
item, the user can make further assignments directly by moving to
the columns of the view and entering an existing name of a
sub-category under the column head. In this manner, a link
structure is created.
[0004] Unfortunately, the system disclosed in U.S. Pat. No.
5,115,504 still requires a user to directly manipulate information
categories on a display screen. Using this approach, a user is
still required to organize the information in some fashion on entry
of the data into the desired category.
[0005] In many situations, it is inefficient and inconvenient for a
user to pre-organize and explicitly store information in this
fashion. Moreover, further efficiencies could be obtained if a user
could provide input in a convenient free form or natural language
representation. It would also improve prior art systems if a user
could update an information item or action item easily, quickly and
without losing the context in which he/she is currently
engaged.
[0006] Another disadvantage of the prior art systems described
above, is that they do not provide a mechanism for collaboration
between users or between applications. Organizing one's own
information is important, but actions/projects are often shared
between two or more people. In other words, it is not sufficient to
organize one's own To Do lists and calendars. The user should also
be able to collaborate with other users to assign projects, accept
project assignments, and inform others. Furthermore, an ability to
notify others of the status of projects is advantageous.
[0007] One prior art method of allowing multiple users to work
together includes using e-mail to send messages to others. Although
this prior art application allows users to communicate regarding
any topic, it is not linked to calendars, lists, or external
databases maintained by the users. Thus, as an agreement evolves
with each e-mail exchange, the user is often involved in updating
everything associated with the project. It would further improve
prior art systems if a user could update an action item easily,
quickly and without losing the context in which he/she is currently
engaged. Further, it would be an improvement over the prior art to
provide a system whereby multiple users could collaborate and track
action items between many participants and across many computer
systems.
[0008] Another prior art method utilizes top down delegation. This
allows a supervisor to delegate projects to subordinates. However,
it does not allow negotiation or collaboration between users.
Rather, it is rigidly hierarchical. Thus, this method is not useful
for collaboration and negotiation between peers. Another
disadvantage of such prior art systems is that they use a
client/server system. That is, a server has to be provided as a
repository of information regarding the collaboration process.
Thus, only clients that are connected to the server can participate
in the collaboration. This means that persons who are not linked to
the same server can not participate in the collaborative
environment.
[0009] It would be an improvement over the prior art to provide a
system that allows collaboration between two or more users.
Further, it would be an improvement over the prior art to provide a
system whereby multiple users could collaborate and track action
items between many participants and across many computer
systems.
[0010] Thus, a better natural language information organization and
collaboration tool is needed.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
[0011] The present invention is a natural language based
information organization and collaboration tool for a computer
system. The present invention includes an apparatus and method for
processing text expressions in a computer system, the apparatus
including: 1) relational object database defining an information
object with an associated keyword, project, list, contact,
date/time event or enclosure; 2) a user input device for receiving
an input text expression; 3) a parsing device for identifying the
keyword in the input text expression, the parsing device including
functions for linking the input text expression to the information
object based on the keyword identified in the input text
expression; and 4) a user output device for displaying to the user
the identity of the information object to which the input text
expression was linked. The apparatus of the present invention
further includes supplemental information in the object database
which is related to the information object, and the user output
device further includes functions for displaying the supplemental
information when a corresponding keyword is identified in the input
text expression. The apparatus of the present invention further
includes a method and apparatus for collaboration between users of
a time and project management system.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0012] The present invention is illustrated by way of example, and
not by way of limitation, in the figures of the accompanying
drawings and in which like reference numerals refer to similar
elements and in which:
[0013] FIG. 1 illustrates a complete system on which the present
invention may be implemented.
[0014] FIG. 2 is a block diagram of the main system elements of the
present invention.
[0015] FIG. 3 illustrates a display screen showing the keynote and
shadow regions.
[0016] FIGS. 4A, 4B, and 5-7 illustrate the operation of the user
interface of the present invention.
[0017] FIG. 8 is a block diagram of the components of the
parser.
[0018] FIG. 9 is a flow diagram showing the processing flow of the
lexical analysis tool.
[0019] FIGS. 10-11 are flow diagrams showing the processing flow of
the keyword parser.
[0020] FIGS. 12-13 illustrate examples of the processing performed
by the keyword parser.
[0021] FIG. 14 is a flow diagram showing the processing flow of the
suggest list keyword function.
[0022] FIGS. 15-18 illustrate the organization of tables in the
object database of the preferred embodiment.
[0023] FIG. 19 is a diagram of a client/server system.
[0024] FIG. 20 is a diagram of a peer-to-peer distributed
system.
[0025] FIG. 21 is a flowchart illustrating an overview of the
present invention.
[0026] FIG. 22A is a flowchart illustrating the collaboration cycle
as viewed by the originator, or requester.
[0027] FIG. 22B is a flowchart illustrating the collaboration cycle
as viewed by the recipient, or delegate.
[0028] FIG. 23 is a flowchart illustrating the negotiation process
of the present invention.
[0029] FIG. 24 is a flowchart illustrating the distribution of an
FYI note.
[0030] FIGS. 25A and 25B illustrate a graphical an example of the
collaborative process.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT
[0031] The present invention is a natural language based
information organization and collaboration tool for a computer
system. In the following description, numerous specific details are
set forth in order to provide a thorough understanding of the
present invention. However, it will be apparent to one of ordinary
skill in the art that these specific details need not be used to
practice the present invention. In other circumstances, well-known
structures, circuits, and interfaces have not been shown in detail
in order to not obscure unnecessarily the present invention.
[0032] FIG. 1 illustrates a typical data processing system upon
which one embodiment of the present invention is implemented. It
will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art, however
that other alternative systems of various system architectures may
also be used. The data processing system illustrated in FIG. 1
includes a bus or other internal communication means 101 for
communicating information, and a processor 102 coupled to the bus
101 for processing information. The system further comprises a
random access memory (RAM) or other volatile storage device 104
(referred to as main memory), coupled to bus 101 for storing
information and instructions to be executed by processor 102. Main
memory 104 also may be used for storing temporary variables or
other intermediate information during execution of instructions by
processor 102. The system also comprises a read only memory (ROM)
and/or static storage device 106 coupled to bus 101 for storing
static information and instructions for processor 102, and a data
storage device 107 such as a magnetic disk or optical disk and its
corresponding disk drive. Data storage device 107 is coupled to bus
101 for storing information and instructions. The system may
further be coupled to a display device 121, such as a cathode ray
tube (CRT) or a liquid crystal display (LCD) coupled to bus 101
through bus 103 for displaying information to a computer user. An
alphanumeric input device 122, including alphanumeric and other
keys, may also be coupled to bus 101 through bus 103 for
communicating information and command selections to processor 102.
An additional user input device is cursor control device 123, such
as a mouse, a trackball, stylus, or cursor direction keys coupled
to bus 101 through bus 103 for communicating direction information
and command selections to processor 102, and for controlling cursor
movement on display device 121. Another device which may optionally
be coupled to bus 101 thorough bus 103 is a hard copy device or
printer 124 which may be used for printing instructions, data, or
other information on a medium such as paper, film, or similar types
of media. In the preferred embodiment, a communication device 125
is coupled to bus 101 through bus 103 for use in accessing other
nodes of a distributed system via a network. The communication
device 125 may include any of a number of commercially available
networking peripheral devices such as those used for coupling to an
Ethernet, token ring, Internet, or wide area network. Note that any
or all of the components of this system illustrated in FIG. 1 and
associated hardware may be used in various embodiments of the
present invention; however, it will be appreciated by those of
ordinary skill in the art that any configuration of the system may
be used for various purposes according to the particular
implementation. In one embodiment of the present invention, the
data processing system illustrated in FIG. 1 is an IBM.RTM.
compatible personal computer or a Sun.RTM. SPARC workstation.
Processor 102 may be one of the 80.times.86 compatible
microprocessors such as the 80486 or PENTIUM.RTM. brand
microprocessors manufactured by INTEL.RTM. Corporation of Santa
Clara, Calif.
[0033] The control logic or software implementing the present
invention can be stored in main memory 104, mass storage device
107, or other storage medium locally accessible to processor 102.
Other storage media may include floppy disks, memory cards, flash
memory, or CD-ROM drives. It will be apparent to those of ordinary
skill in the art that the methods and processes described herein
can be implemented as software stored in main memory 104 or read
only memory 106 and executed by processor 102. This control logic
or software may also be resident on an article of manufacture
comprising a computer readable medium 108 having computer readable
program code embodied therein and being readable by the mass
storage device 107 and for causing the processor 102 to operate in
accordance with the methods and teachings herein.
[0034] The software of the present invention may also be embodied
in a handheld or portable device containing a subset of the
computer hardware IS components described above. For example, the
handheld device may be configured to contain only the bus 101, the
processor 102, and memory 104 and/or 106. The handheld device may
also be configured to include a set of buttons or input signalling
components with which a user may select from a set of available
options. The handheld device may also be configured to include an
output apparatus such as a liquid crystal display (LCD) or display
element matrix for displaying information to a user of the handheld
device. Conventional methods may be used to implement such a
handheld device. The implementation of the present invention for
such a device would be apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art
given the disclosure of the present invention as provided
herein.
[0035] The present invention is a natural language based, parsable,
always available, intelligent note editor that captures user
thoughts, action requests, and information in a computer system.
The present invention uses natural language parsing to identify
keywords and date information amongst a free form text input
expression (denoted keynote herein) entered by a user and
establishes links to other information objects based on the
identified words. These linked other objects include projects,
contacts, date/time events, lists, and document identifier objects.
Keywords are pre-defined one word or multiple word text strings
with or without punctuation that are associated or linked to one or
more related information objects. Lists are user-established
collections of related keynotes. Lists can be action-related or
merely archived memos. The present invention further classifies the
text input (i.e., keynote) as a particular type of keynote, such as
an action, a memo, a personal keynote, a shared keynote, an action
request, an FYI (for your information) message, or one of several
other different types of keynotes. A personal keynote is one not
intended to be sent to anyone else. A shared keynote is sent to
others. Once the keynote is classified, the present invention takes
action upon the keynote by sending an action request to a linked
contact, updating a linked list, contact, date/time expression, or
project data, sharing the keynote to others in a collaboration
group, or storing information related to the keynote in an
organized and efficient manner. The present invention includes a
real-time and interactive user interface for receiving input text
expressions from a user and for providing selectable supplemental
information to the user regarding the classification of the
keynote. In addition, the present invention includes a parser for
processing natural language in the manner described above.
[0036] FIG. 2 illustrates in block diagram form the main components
of the preferred embodiment of the present invention. A user
provides natural language text expressions (i.e., keynotes)
representing notes, thoughts, or action requests which are provided
to user interface 200. User interface 200 passes these text
expressions to parser 300. Parser 300 is responsible for
identifying the type of keynote and for linking the keynote to one
or more corresponding information objects based upon identified
keywords or date/time expressions found in the input text
expression. The linked objects include lists, projects, contacts,
e-mail addresses, enclosed document identifiers, and date/time
events for use in a calendar. Parser 300 uses lexical analysis tool
400 to partition the input text expression into a plurality of
tokens. Tokens are sequential or adjacent portions of the input
text expression between pre-specified delimiters. Once parser 300
has classified the keynote type and has linked the keynote to the
associated objects, the linked list, project, contact, associated
e-mail addresses endorsed document identifiers, and any calendar
event, is passed back to user interface 200 and displayed by user
interface 200 in a keynote and shadow region on display device
121.
[0037] Referring now to FIG. 3, an example of the keynote and
shadow region 210 of user interface 200 is illustrated in
relationship to the content of display device 121. In its typical
application, the keynote and shadow region 210 of the present
invention are displayed on display device 121 in combination with
other windows or informational and functional regions of display
device 121. The display of windows and informational or functional
of regions on a display device is well-known to those of ordinary
skill in the art. For example, the Windows 95.TM. operating system
developed by Microsoft Corporation of Redmond, Wash. is an example
of an operating system providing for the display of such windows.
Keynote and shadow region 210 of the present invention may be
displayed using the windowing and display functions provided by
such an operating system. In the alternative, it will be apparent
to those of ordinary skill in the art that other means for
displaying such an informational area on a display device may
equivalently be provided by other conventional operating systems or
application programs. It will also be appreciated by those of
ordinary skill in the art that the keynote and shadow region 210
may be displayed at any arbitrary position or at any arbitrary size
using the conventional tools of the operating system. Moreover,
conventional operating systems provide means for specifying a
display priority or level with which the keynote and shadow region
210 may be specified and coded to always be displayed at the top
most display priority or level. Thus, the keynote and shadow region
210 may be programmed to be always visible and always available on
display screen 121 using conventional methods. In this manner, the
present invention provides an always available method for entering
textual information into a window or display region that provides
real time feedback of parsing and keyword matching of the text
entered.
[0038] Referring now to FIGS. 4A and 4B, examples illustrate the
components comprising the keynote and shadow region 210 of the
preferred embodiment. The keynote region 220 is an on screen
computer version of a paper sticky note allowing the user to
quickly capture information and ideas. The keynote region 220
provides a display area for the entry of a natural language text
expression (i.e. keynote) representing textual information and
ideas the user would like to capture. An example of such a keynote
in keynote region 220 is shown in FIG. 4B. Any type of natural
language text expression may be entered in keynote region 220.
Conventional techniques may be used to display and word wrap the
text in keynote region 220. Further, conventional techniques may be
used for the selection or identification of keynote region 220 for
the entry of text input. For example, the cursor control device
123, mouse, or special key codes entered on the key board 122 of
the computer system may be used to select keynote region 220 for
the entry of a text expression. As each key stroke is input to
keynote region 220, the individual key stroke is transferred to
user interface 200 and subsequently to parser 300 as will be
described below in a later section of this document.
[0039] Referring again to FIGS. 4A and 4B, a shadow region 230 is
provided to display the output of a parsed text expression and to
capture input icon selections from the user. Shadow region 230 is a
window that appears beneath, or alternatively adjacent to, the
keynote region 220 and contains linked object information in data
fields that are automatically set as a result of parsing the
keynote entered into keynote region 220. Shadow 230 includes a set
of icons 240 which are always visible along with keynote region 220
in the preferred embodiment icons 240 serve two purposes. First,
icons 240 can be distinctively displayed in one of two states to
represent the presence or absence of a link to a corresponding
object as a result of parsing the keynote. For example, an icon of
icons 240 representing a contact information object may be
highlighted if contact information has been found as a result of
parsing the keynote. Similarly, other icons corresponding to
projects, lists, calendars, or endorsed documents may also be
highlighted or unhighlighted depending on the presence or absence
of links to objects, such as projects, lists, calendar events, or
enclosed document information found as a result of parsing the
keynote. Alternatively, the keywords of a keynote linked to a
project, list, calendar event, or enclosed document object may be
distinctively displayed in the keynote itself. For example, the
keyword or keywords linking the keynote to a project object may be
displayed in a first color or font type or style. The the keyword
or keywords linking the keynote to a contact object may be
displayed in a second color or font type or style. Similarly, other
keywords linking the keynote to other objects may also be
distinctively displayed to inform the user that the parser 300 has
identified the corresponding keyword in the input text
expression.
[0040] The second function served by the icons 240 and a related
dropdown list control is a means for a user to select the display
of the linked object type corresponding to a particular selected
icon. The output produced by parser 300 is displayed in region 250
of shadow 230. Although shadow 230 may initially be displayed
beneath keynote 220, the user may bring the shadow region 230 in
front of the keynote region 220 by clicking on the shadow region
230 with the cursor control device 123 or by typing a pre-specified
key entry on the keyboard 122. Alternatively, the shadow region 230
may also be selected for display using a menu command.
[0041] Referring now to FIG. 5, the generic version of the keynote
and shadow region 210 of the preferred embodiment of the present
invention is illustrated in its initial state. As shown, keynote
220 is initially blank prior to the entry of any keynote. Shadow
region 230 includes a set of icons identified generically as I1
through I5. In this example, icon I1 represents a project object;
icon I2 represents a contact object; icon I4 represents a date/time
calendar object; icon I5 represents a list object. It will be
apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that other types of
information or objects may correspond to each of the icons 240 of
shadow 230. Similarly, it will be apparent to one of ordinary skill
in the art that an arbitrary number of icons 240 may equivalently
be provided in shadow region 230.
[0042] Referring now to FIG. 6, the keynote and shadow region 210
are shown after the entry of a keynote 222 indicated within a
dotted circle region (for illustrative purposes only). It will be
apparent to one of ordinary skill in the art that the dotted line
is shown in FIG. 6 for illustrative purposes only and is not
actually displayed in the preferred embodiment. As a result of
parsing keynote 222, several output results have been produced by
the present invention. First, the individual icons of icons 240
corresponding to object types linked by parser 300 to input keynote
222 are highlighted. For example, icon I1 is highlighted because
parser 300 has linked a project object (i.e., "wilson deal") to
keynote 222. Similarly, icon I2 is highlighted because parser 300
has linked a contact object (i.e. "Paul") to keynote 222. Icon I4
is highlighted because parser 300 has linked a date/time calendar
event object ("next Thursday") to input keynote 222. Finally, icon
I5 has been highlighted because parser 300 has linked a list
("Call") to input keynote 222. It win be apparent to one of
ordinary skill in the art that if an information object type
corresponding to a particular icon was not found by parser 300 in
input keynote 222, the corresponding icon would not be highlighted
in shadow region 230. A second result of the parsing of input
keynote 222 by the present invention is classification of the
keynote as one of several different keynote types, such as an
action, memo, personal keynote, shared keynote, action request, FYI
message, etc. Finally, the structured output information or linked
object data is displayed in display area 250 of shadow 230. This
output information is described in more detail in connection with
FIG. 7.
[0043] Referring now to FIG. 7, the keynote and shadow region 210
is illustrated after the shadow region 230 has been brought to the
foreground using the cursor control device 123 or a prespecified
keyboard 122 entry. Region 250 of shadow 230 illustrates the
structured information output produced as a result of parsing the
sample input keynote 222 shown in FIG. 6 As a result of parsing
input keynote 222, parser 300 has linked the reference to "wilson
deal" in input keynote 222 to the previously specified "Wilson
Account" project object. The linked project object "Wilson Account"
is displayed in region 250 adjacent to corresponding icon I1.
Similarly, parser 300 has linked the reference to "Paul" in input
keynote 222 to the previously specified contact object "Paul
Jones". The linked contact object "Paul Jones" is displayed in
region 250 adjacent to its corresponding icon I2. The parser 300
has linked a date/time calendar event object as a result of parsing
the "next Thursday" text in keynote 222. This processed time/date
calendar event object is displayed in region 250 of shadow 230
adjacent to the corresponding icon I4. Finally, parser 300 has
linked the keyword "call" in input keynote 222 to the previously
specified "Calls" list previously defined as a list object. The
identification of the linked Calls list is displayed in region 250
of shadow 230 adjacent to the corresponding icon I5.
[0044] Drop down list indicators 260 are provided to cause a list
to expand downward so a multiple line list of objects or
information is displayed in a drop down portion of region 250.
Conventional methods exist for providing drop down list indicators
on a computer display device.
[0045] Thus, user interface 200 and its corresponding keynote and
shadow regions 210 provide a means and method for receiving a
natural language text expression from a user and for concisely and
efficiently displaying the parsed and linked structured output of
the text expression in an area on display device 121. In the
following sections, the detailed description of the processing
performed by parser 300 and lexical analysis tool 400 is
provided.
[0046] As can be seen from FIGS. 3-7 and the above description in
connection with user interface 200 of the present invention, user
interface 200 provides an easy and intuitive user interface for
inputting text expressions and receiving resulting associated
structured information. Further, because the keynote and shadow
regions 210 are always displayed or easily displayable on display
device 121, the user may easily record notes or thoughts within the
keynote window 220 without losing the context of the work
previously being done. In this manner, the present invention allows
the easy recordation of notes without disrupting current user
operations. In addition, the present invention allows notes to be
recorded in a natural language unstructured form which more closely
resembles the natural user thought processes. Thus, the user is not
required to organize these notes or thoughts into particular
structured fields and the user is not required to navigate through
a multiple step application to record notes or thoughts. A further
advantage of the present invention is the ability to integrate the
operation of several conventional computer applications into a
central free form user interface. Because the present invention
provides a means for parsing natural language into structured
information linked to project objects, contact objects, date/time
calendar event objects, or list objects, the structured information
thereby produced can be easily integrated to a word processor
application, a calendaring application, a database application, a
project management application, or an electronic mail application.
The present invention thereby allows the user to input an
unstructured text expression which can be parsed into structured
information which is thereafter provided as input to this variety
of conventional software applications.
Parser
[0047] The parser 300 of the preferred embodiment receives natural
language text expressions from user interface 200 and produces
structured information including links to information objects, such
as projects, contacts, lists, date/time calendar items, and
enclosed documents corresponding to those identified to keywords in
the input text expression. Although many parsing algorithms exist
in the prior art, the parser 300 of the present invention is unique
in its ability to effectively identify and suggest keywords and/or
date/time calendar events in an input text string and respond with
interactive user real-time performance. Parser 300 of the preferred
embodiment accomplishes these objectives with a novel internal
architecture and set of methods for processing a natural language
text expression The architecture and methods used by the parser 300
of the present invention will be described in the following
sections.
[0048] The present invention solves the problem of interpreting
structure and meaning from natural language text. This meaning is a
set of structured information related to or linked to other
pertinent information known to and pre-defined by the user. The
following example illustrates the operation of the present
invention.
[0049] Suppose a user enters the following sample keynote to the
user interface 200 of the present invention:
[0050] "call Scott tomorrow to arrange the next Engineering
meeting."
[0051] The parser 300 of the present invention is used to analyze
this keynote in real-time as the user enters the keynote character
by character. Note that the entire keynote is parsed after the
entry of each new character. After the entire keynote is entered by
the user and analyzed by parser 300, the following structured
information output is produced by parser 300:
[0052] lists: Calls
[0053] project: arrange Engineering meetings until Dennis gets
back
[0054] contact: Scott Jones
[0055] date: tomorrow=current date+1 day
[0056] In this example, parser 300 of the present invention
recognized the keyword "call" in the input keynote and determined
that this text input keyword should be linked to or related to the
"Calls" list. The parser 300 of the present invention also
recognized the keyword "Scott" and determined that this contact
name should be linked to the contact object "Scott Jones". The word
"tomorrow" was also recognized by parser 300, which calculated
tomorrow's date (i.e., current date+1 day) and linked this date
object to the input keynote. The keywords "Engineering meeting"
were recognized by parser 300 as a link to the previously defined
"arrange Engineering meetings until Dennis gets back" project
object. Note that the present invention displays these links
between the input keynote and corresponding linked object types in
the data areas for the list, project, contact, or date/time
calendar event objects in display region 250.
[0057] One important goal of the present invention is to ease the
computer user's workload by anticipating his/her intentions based
on the natural language text expression that has been entered. By
anticipating the user's intentions with a reasonable degree of
accuracy, the present invention allows the user to capture
information in a much more efficient and comfortable manner. For
example, after simply typing the input keynote in the example
presented above: "call Scott tomorrow to arrange the next
Engineering meeting", the user is not required to spend valuable
time navigating around the display screen or an application user
interface to link the input keynote to the desired list, project,
contact, and date/time calendar event objects. The present
invention automatically handles the linkage of the unstructured
information in the input keynote to corresponding structured
information objects. The user is thus able to save the keynote,
send the keynote, or initiate action upon the keynote very quickly
with very little user intervention.
[0058] Referring now to FIG. 8, a block diagram illustrates
internal components of parser 300 and its relationship to the user
interface 200, lexical analysis tool 400, and object database 850.
Parser 300 includes keyword and date/time parser 810 which receives
the input natural language keynote from user interface 200. The
keyword and date/time parser 810 includes a keyword parser and a
date/time parser. The keyword parser of keyword and date/time
parser 810 is responsible for parsing keywords from the input
keynote Keywords, can be linked to a variety of different object
types including lists, project, contact, document enclosure objects
and even dates (e.g., "Dave's Birthday"=6/25). Each of these
different types of objects are maintained in parser 300. List
object 820 is used to maintain user defined list objects. Project
object 822 is used to maintain user defined project objects.
Contact object 824 is used to maintain contact name objects.
Enclosure object 826 is used to maintain enclosure or document
identifier objects. Other object types 828 may similarly be
provided. For each type of object, the keyword parser of keyword
and date/time parser 810 links objects 820 through 828 to
corresponding keywords of the input keynote in a manner described
in more detail below.
[0059] The date/time parser of keyword and date/time parser 810 is
used to scan the input keynote for the presence of information
corresponding to a date or time event. The operation of the
date/time parser is described in more detail in a later section of
this document.
[0060] Keyword and date/time parser 810 interfaces with a lexical
analysis tool 400. It will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in
art that the functions performed by lexical analysis tool 400 may
equivalently be implemented as an integrated part of parser 300 or
keyword and date/time parser 810. However, in the preferred
embodiment of the present invention, lexical analysis tool 400 is
provided as a software module independent from keyword and
date/time parser 810. Upon receiving an input natural language
keynote from user interface 200, keyword and date/time parser 810
passes this keynote to lexical analysis tool 400 on line 410.
Lexical analysis tool 400 is responsible for producing a set of
tokens from the input keynote.
[0061] Referring now to FIG. 9, a flowchart describes the
processing performed by lexical analysis tool 400. In an initial
processing block 912, lexical analysis tool 400 gets the input
keynote from parser 300. As part of the initialization process, a
character pointer is initialized to point to the first character of
the keynote. A token buffer used for collecting characters of the
current token is initialized in block 912. Next in decision block
914, a loop is started to process each of the characters in the
input keynote. When the entire keynote has been processed,
processing path 916 is taken and the lexical analysis tool 400
returns the output token list to parser 300. If more characters
remain in the input keynote, processing path 916 is taken to
decision block 920. If the current character being processed is not
a delimiter character, processing path 924 is taken to processing
block 928 where the current character is added to the token buffer
and the next character is processed through block 930 and back to
decision block 914. A delimiter character can be one of any
pre-defined special characters such as blank, tab, comma, period,
etc. Referring again to decision block 920 if the current character
is a delimiter character, processing path 922 is taken to
processing block 926 where processing is completed for the
currently collected token. In block 926, any white space or
unnecessary blanks surrounding the token are removed and any upper
or lower case characters of the token may optionally be
standardized to a consistent form of capitalization. Further, the
token is classified as one of several token types such as alpha
character, alpha numeral, date, date span, etc. A numerical
quantity is also associated with the token. The token is also
classified as a date/time token or a keyword token. In the
preferred embodiment, two separate token lists are maintained: one
for keyword tokens and another list for date/time tokens. This
distinction is made because the parser 300 is context sensitive.
For example, the token "Friday" may have special meaning to the
date/time parser but not to the keyword parser. It will be apparent
to those of ordinary skill in the art that the use of separate
token lists is not necessary in alternative embodiments.
[0062] The new token, the token type, and token value information
is then added to an output token list, which represents the token
list that will be returned to parser 300 at the completion of
processing performed by lexical analysis tool 400. Also in
processing block 926, the token buffer is initialized to set up for
collection of the next token and processing is transferred to
processing block 930 where the next character in the keynote is
processed. Using this basic processing flow performed by lexical
analysis tool as shown in FIG. 9, the present invention converts a
natural language free form input keynote to a set of tokens and
token type and value information which can be conveniently
processed by parser 300. The token list is transferred from lexical
analysis tool 400 to parser 300 on path 420 as shown in FIG. 8.
[0063] The interface between parser 300 and lexical analysis tool
400 may also be used to exchange tokens between parser 300 and
lexical analysis tool 400 for the purpose of obtaining a multiple
word token that may be used to represent a particular date/time
event. The parser 300 and lexical analysis tool 400 exchange
date/time tokens until the parser 300 finds a date/time processing
path that succeeds for the date/time token.
[0064] FIGS. 10-13 illustrate the operation of the keyword parser
of keyword and date/time parser 810 of the present invention. FIGS.
10 and 11 are flowcharts illustrating the processing flow of the
keyword parser of keyword and date/time parser 810. FIGS. 12 and 13
illustrate examples of the operation of the keyword parser of
keyword and date/time parser 810.
[0065] Referring now to FIG. 12, examples illustrate the manner in
which object dictionary 851 is initially loaded with keyword
information. On initialization, the object database 850 is accessed
to obtain the initial objects to be loaded into object dictionary
851. Because local data in the object dictionary 851 can be used,
the operation of the parser 300 is much faster. More details on the
object database 850 are provided in a later section of this
document.
[0066] Object dictionary 851 includes a trigger table 856, a
keyword dictionary 852, and keyword definitions table 854. Trigger
table 856 includes entries called triggers for each of the tokens
from which keywords are formulated. Associated with each trigger is
a reference count identifying the number of keywords of which the
corresponding trigger is a member. Keyword dictionary 852 includes
the identity of each of the keywords pre-defined using methods or
calls provided by the keyword parser of keyword and date/time
parser 810. Blocks 1210, 1212, and 1214 shown in FIG. 12 illustrate
three examples of calls to an "add keyword" function or method used
to add an entry to keyword dictionary 852. These calls are also
used to load keyword definition information into keyword definition
table 854. As shown in the examples in FIG. 12, keyword definitions
include a reference to a list object, a project object, and a
contact object associated with each keyword in the keyword
dictionary 852. The keyword dictionary 852 includes a definition
link (Def. Link) which points to the keyword definition entry
corresponding to the keyword in the keyword dictionary 852. As a
result of the sample method calls 1210, 1212, and 1214 illustrated
in FIG. 12, keyword dictionary 852, keyword definition table 854,
and trigger table 856 are populated with keywords and associated
keyword definitions and triggers. Once these tables and storage
areas of object dictionary 851 are populated, the keyword parser of
keyword and date/time parser 810 can be used to parse a user input
keynote from a natural language form including these predefined
keywords into an output structured information table containing the
linked list objects, project objects, and contact objects
associated to the keywords detected by the keyword parser of
keyword and date/time parser 810 in the user input keynote.
[0067] Referring now to FIGS. 10 and 11, flowcharts illustrate the
processing logic used by the keyword parser of keyword and
date/time parser 810 for performing this function. In an initial
processing block 1010, a keyword buffer, a current keyword buffer,
and an output buffer are initialized. The keyword buffer is used to
temporarily hold a portion of a keyword (ie., one or more tokens)
until a most complete (i.e., longest) keyword can be built. The
current keyword buffer is used for the storage of the currently
most complete keyword. The output buffer is used for storage of the
structured information or keyword definition information retrieved
for the keywords of the current user input keynote. In processing
block 1012 the next token in the user input keynote is retrieved.
If the retrieved token is a trigger as determined by accessing the
trigger table 856, the processing path 1018 is taken to processing
block 1022 where the trigger is appended to the contents of the
keyword buffer. Next, the keyword dictionary 852 is searched for
the current contents of the keyword buffer in decision block 1024.
If the contents of the keyword buffer are found in keyword
dictionary 852, processing continues with processing block 1026
where the contents of the keyword buffer are stored in the current
keyword buffer. In this situation, the current collection of tokens
in the keyword buffer were found in keyword dictionary 852. If
there are more tokens in the user input keynote, path 1030 is taken
back to processing block 1012 where the next token is retrieved and
the above process is repeated.
[0068] Referring again to decision block 1014, if the retrieved
token is not a trigger as determined by access to trigger table
856, processing path 1016 is taken to decision block 1020 where the
contents of the current keyword buffer are checked. If the current
keyword buffer is empty, processing continues at decision block
1028 through the bubble labeled A. In this case, the current token
is simply thrown away. If the current keyword buffer is not empty
however, processing continues at the bubble labeled B illustrated
in FIG. 11. Similarly, processing continues at the bubble labeled B
if the current keyword buffer is not empty for the last token in
the user input keynote resulting in traversal of processing path
1034.
[0069] Referring now to FIG. 11, processing continues for the
keyword parser of keyword and date/time parser 810 at the bubble
labeled B. In this situation, the current keyword buffer contains
the greatest number of continuous tokens found in the user input
keynote that form a predefined keyword in keyword dictionary 852.
In this case, the current keyword in the current keyword buffer is
used to perform a look up for the associated keyword in keyword
dictionary 852 (processing block 1110). Once the keyword is found
in keyword dictionary 852, the corresponding keyword definition
from keyword definition table 854 is retrieved. The corresponding
keyword definition includes the list, the project, and the contact
object information corresponding to the matched keyword from the
keyword dictionary (processing block 1112). In decision block 1114,
a test is performed to determine if the keyword definition
components (i.e., the list, the project, and the contact) have been
previously modified in the output buffer. If this is true
(processing path 1118), the current content of the output buffer is
not further modified by execution of the operation in processing
block 1116. In processing block 1116, the keyword definition
information from the keyword dictionary is stored into the
previously unmodified portions of the output buffer. In the present
invention, if keywords or the tokens of a keyword are not mixed,
and the keyword parser of keyword and date/time parser 810 detects
two or more keywords that link to different keyword definitions,
the keyword parser of keyword and date/time parser 810 of the
preferred embodiment picks the keyword definition whose keyword
appeared first or left-most in the user input keynote. Further, if
two or more keywords or the tokens of the keywords are mixed
together, the keyword parser of keyword and date/time parser 810 of
the preferred embodiment picks the longest keyword from left to
right in the user input keynote and then throws away all of the
tokens of this longest keyword from further consideration in
processing the remainder of the user input keynote. Using these
parsing rules in the present invention, the resulting output
structured information is predictable and understandable given an
input keynote. Once the output buffer is loaded in processing block
1116, processing continues at the bubble labeled A illustrated in
FIG. 10. Referring again to FIG. 10 and the bubble labeled A, the
processing loop for processing tokens continues at decision block
1028 until all of the tokens in the input keynote are
processed.
[0070] Referring now to FIG. 13, four examples (1-4) illustrate the
operation of the preferred embodiment of the present invention
given a user input keynote in association with the corresponding
output structured information produced by the keyword parser of
keyword and date/time parser 810 of the present invention. Further,
the examples illustrated in FIG. 13 are based on the preloaded
object dictionary 851 illustrated in FIG. 12. As described above in
connection with FIG. 12, the object dictionary 851 including
trigger table 856, keyword dictionary 852 and keyword definition
table 854 is loaded with information such as the sample information
illustrated in FIG. 12. Based on this information, the present
invention produces the output structured information illustrated in
FIG. 13 given the input keynotes shown for each example.
[0071] Referring now to FIGS. 12 and 13, in a first example, given
the input keynote "hello world", the present invention matches this
input keynote with the "hello world" keyword found at row 2 in
keyword dictionary 852 shown in FIG. 12. As a result, the content
of row 2 of keyword definition table 854 shown in FIG. 12 is
transferred to the output structured information buffer shown in
the first example in FIG. 13.
[0072] In the second example shown in FIG. 13, the input keynote
"hello world peace" is parsed by the present invention. As a
result, the present invention matches this second sample input
keynote with the "hello world" keyword found at row 2 in keyword
dictionary 852. In this case, the keyword definition at row 2 of
keyword definition table 854 shown in FIG. 12 is transferred to the
output structured information buffer as shown for the second
example illustrated in FIG. 13. Note that the keyword "world peace"
in the second example shown in FIG. 13 does not cause the keyword
definition in the output structured information buffer to be
modified.
[0073] Referring now to the third example illustrated in FIG. 13,
the input keynote "hello everyone world peace" is processed by the
keyword parser of keyword and date/time parser 810. In this case,
the keyword parser of keyword and date/time parser 810 matches the
"hello" keyword with the first row of keyword dictionary 852 shown
in FIG. 12. In this case, the keyword definition at row 1 of
keyword definition table 854 shown in FIG. 12 is transferred to the
output structured information buffer shown for the third example
illustrated in FIG. 13. In further parsing of the input keynote for
the third example shown in FIG. 13, the keyword "world peace" is
matched with the third row of keyword dictionary 852 shown in FIG.
12. However, because the list and contact components of keyword
definition 854 have already been modified by the previously matched
keyword ("hello"), the list and contact components in the output
structured information are not further modified for the "world
peace" keyword definition.
[0074] Referring to the fourth example illustrated in FIG. 13, the
input keynote is parsed by the keyword parser of keyword and
date/time parser 810.
[0075] In this case, the keyword "hello" is matched to the first
row of keyword dictionary 852 and the corresponding keyword
definition from row 1 is is transferred to the output structured
information buffer as shown for the fourth example illustrated in
FIG. 13. In this case, however, further parsing of the input
keynote in the fourth example matches the keyword "hello world" to
the second row of keyword dictionary 852. The corresponding keyword
definition from row 2 is obtained. Because the project component of
the keyword definition was not previously modified, the project
definition for the second row of the keyword definition table 854
can be transferred to the project component of the output
structured information buffer illustrated for the fourth example
shown in FIG. 13.
[0076] The present invention indudes methods and objects for
suggesting new keywords to a user given a predefined object
dictionary 851 and an input user keynote.
[0077] Referring now to FIG. 14, a flowchart illustrates the
processing performed for suggesting keywords to be linked to
contact objects. It will be apparent to one of ordinary skill in
the art that a similar set of processing may be performed for
lists, projects, enclosures, or other keyword definition
components. In processing block 1410, the user input keynote is
parsed into tokens by lexical analysis tool 400. Each token can
then be compared with the keyword dictionary 852 to determine if
the token is already a predefined keyword (processing block 1414).
In addition, the token may be checked with the content of a
pre-defined list of words explicitly defined as not suggestible. If
the token is not already in keyword dictionary 852 and the token is
not on the list of non-suggestible words, the token may be
suggested as a keyword in processing block 1416. If the token is
already present in keyword dictionary 852 or the token is on the
list of non-suggestible words, the token cannot be suggested. In
this case, the token can be augmented in a variety of ways to
render the token distinctly different from other keywords currently
residing in keyword dictionary 852. As an example of such an
augmentation of a token, the first character of the next sequential
token in the input keynote may be used and concatenated with the
token currently being processed. This augmented token may then be
compared with the contents of keyword dictionary 852 to determine
if the augmented token is not currently present in the keyword
dictionary and not on the list of non-suggestible words. If the
augmented token is found in keyword dictionary 852 or the augmented
token is on the list of non-suggestible words, the augmented token
may be further augmented using additional characters of the next
token or the previous token in the input keynote. This process
continues until a unique and suggestible augmented token is
generated. This unique and suggestible augmented token may then be
suggested as a keyword to the user in processing block 1418.
Finally, all tokens in the input keynote may be appended together
as a combined token. This combined token is compared with the
contents of keyword dictionary 852 and the list of non-suggestible
words to determine if the combined tokens are currently defined as
a keyword in the keyword dictionary or as non-suggestible. If not,
the combined tokens may be suggested as an additional keyword in
processing block 1420.
[0078] In an alternative embodiment, the logic for suggesting
keywords may employ different heuristics based on the type of
object for which keywords are being suggested. Thus, for example as
described above for contact objects, it may be desirable to augment
a keyword to include characters from subsequent tokens or to create
initials from multiple tokens as one may do for the name of a
contact. However, this process may not be appropriate for creating
augmented keywords for list or project objects. In these cases, a
somewhat different augmentation process may be used. The use of
different heuristics based on the type of object is easily
implemented with the present invention because the type of object
will be known at the time the suggesting process is employed. By
knowing the type of object for which a keyword suggestion is being
generated, the appropriate heuristic may be selected.
[0079] Thus, the processing performed by the present invention for
parsing keywords is described.
Date/Time Parser
[0080] The implementation of the date/time parser of keyword and
date/time parser 810 of the present invention is described in the
following sections. The date/time parser of keyword and date/time
parser 810 uses lexical analysis tool 400 to break an input keynote
into date relevant tokens and to identify tokens in the input
expression that may be relevant to date parsing. The lexical
analysis tool 400 uses a method for breaking the input keynote into
date relevant tokens similar to the method described above in
connection with FIG. 9. In addition, lexical analysis tool 400
provides for each token a specification of the type of the token
and a numerical value associated with the token. For example, the
word "two" would be dassified by lexical analysis tool 400 as a
numerical type token with a value equal to 2. As another example,
the token "Monday" would be classified by lexical analysis tool 400
as a day type token with a numerical value equal to 2,
corresponding to the second day of the week. As another example,
the token "/" would be classified as a date separator token with an
undefined numerical value. In a similar manner, all other tokens
associated with date or time events are similarly predefined with a
specific type and a predefined numerical value which lexical
analysis tool 400 provides as output to keyword and date/time
parser 810 when the particular token is identified in the input
keynote. Using the token and token type information provided by
lexical analysis tool 400, the date/time parser of keyword and
date/time parser 810 is able to parse and recognize date/time
events in an input keynote.
[0081] The date/time parser of keyword and date/time parser 810 is
responsible for parsing the input keynote to interpret dates and
times from the natural language input keynotes as entered by a
user. The goal of the day/time parser 814 of the present invention
is to parse a set of date and time tokens from an input keynote and
determine with perfect accuracy the intended date or time
constraint applied by a user. The format used by the present
invention is simple, short, intuitive, and powerful enough to allow
a user to express almost any date/time value by typing a short and
simple expression directly as natural language text rather than
being forced to navigate through a maze of dialogs or to manipulate
numerous command buttons, check boxes, or other graphical user
interface components.
[0082] The date/time parsing performed by the date/time parser of
keyword and date/time parser 810 uses a novel form of recursive
descent with infinite look ahead technique. This technique provides
an O(N) complexity methodology. Similarly, the keyword parser of
keyword and date/time parser 810 achieves an O(N) complexity. This
is the best complexity theoretically possible. Thus, the
performance of the present invention is well suited for real-time
applications requiring quick response.
[0083] The following is a list of date expressions recognized and a
list of rules employed by the keyword and date/time parser 810 of
the preferred embodiment:
1 Date Description Parses to This Date today Mon., Jun. 10, 1996
this morning/afternoon/evening Rule: Parse to current date tonight
tonite tomorrow Tues., Jun. 11, 1996 tomorrow morning/afternoon/
Rule: Parse to the current date + evening/night 1 day [0]6/10 Mon.,
Jun. 10, 1996 [0]6-10 Rule: Parse to the current date or the
nearest future occurrence of the specified date. [0]6.10 June 10
June 10th June ten[th] ten[th] of June [0]6/10/98 Wed., Jun. 10,
1998 [0]6-10-98 Rule: Parse to the specified date. [0]6.10.98 Note:
The parser must be configured for European locations to enable
handling of the DD/MM/YY date format. Jun. 10, 1998 10 Jun. 1998
two days* from today** Wed., Jun. 12, 1996 Rule: Parse to the
Specified starting date ("today," etc.) + specified increment ("two
days," etc.). in/within fourteen days* Mon., Jun. 24, 1996 Rule:
Parse to the current date + specified number of days or weeks.
Adding months will yield the same day of the month (if possible), x
months later. In other words, "2 months from "june 4th, 96" will
yield "August 4th, 96". "one month from May 31st", will yield "June
30th" (the last day of the month, since June 31st does not exist).
Similarly, "five years from May 5, 1994" will yield "May 5, 1999".
Monday Mon., Jun. 17, 1996 this Monday Rule: Parse to the next
occurrence of the specified day; never the current date. For
example, Tuesday" is Tue, Jun. 11, 1996. this coming Monday next
Monday Mon, Jun. 17, 1996 Rule: Parse to: 1. "next <day>" is
specified during the next week, using Monday as the first day of
the week. 2. "On a Sunday, "next <day>" parses to the
specified day during the 2nd week following the Sunday (i.e., the
week beginning eight days from the Sunday) - except for Sunday,
which parses to the Sunday that is one week away. first*** Monday
of next month Mon., Jul. 3, 1996 first*** Monday of/in July Rule:
Parse to the first occurrence of the specified day during the next
month on the calendar. first*** Monday of June, 1995 first***
Monday of June, 1995 first*** Monday of June, 1995 * Could specify
"weeks," "months," "years," "Mondays," "Tuesdays," etc. instead of
"days" ** Could specify "tomorrow," "next Thursday," etc. instead
of "today" *** Could specify "second", "third", "fourth", "fifth",
and "last" Recurring events can occur on a daily, weekly, monthly,
annual basis. The keyword and date/time parser 810 also handles the
entry of recurring events. The keyword and date/time parser 810
recognizes the following types of recurring event specifications
and associated date-related keywords or key expressions. Note that
other forms may similarly be handled. every day* every other day*
every three days* every Thursday every weekday (every Monday,
Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday) every weekend (every
Saturday & Sunday) every other weekend every other Thursday
Tuesdays (every Tuesday) weekdays (every weekday) first Thursday of
every [other] month first Thursday of every three months fifteenth
of every month *"day(s)" can be replaced by "week(s)", "month(s)",
and "year(s)". Note: Assume today is Monday, Jun. 10, 1996 while
reading this table.
[0084] Note that recurring dates are assumed to occur forever in
the preferred embodiment. The keyword and date/time parser 810
always picks an intelligent starting date, but does not report an
ending date. For example, assuming that today is Monday, Jun. 11,
1996, "every Tuesday" will be interpreted by the parser 810 as
"every Tuesday" starting Tuesday, Jun. 12, 1996 (the nearest
weekday starting from today).
[0085] As with dates, abbreviations and numerical/ordinal
substitutions are correctly interpreted.
DLL Interface of the Preferred Embodiment of the Present
Invention
[0086] The following section describes the interface to the parser
300 dynamic link library (DLL) component of the preferred
embodiment of the present invention. The generic use of DLL's is
well known to those of ordinary skill in the art.
[0087] The parser 300 of the preferred embodiment is composed of a
single DLL. In this embodiment, the DLL is written in the C++
programming language. It will be apparent to those of ordinary
skill in the art that other programming languages, such as C,
Basic, etc., may alternatively be used. The parser 300 capabilities
of the preferred embodiment include the following:
[0088] Date and time parsing.
[0089] Recurring event parsing.
[0090] List, project, and contact parsing via keywords.
[0091] Suggestions of list, project, and contact keywords.
[0092] Automatic Completion (auto-complete or auto-fill) of list,
project, and contact names. This process is similar to a
conventional "quick fill" technique designed to assist the user by
completing the partial entry of data based on previously entered
data.
[0093] Collaboration parsing.
[0094] From the point of view of parser 300, date and time parsing
requires no special knowledge of data. On the other hand, parsing,
completing, and suggesting keywords, lists, projects, and contacts
requires explicit knowledge of the existing or predefined lists,
projects, contacts, and keywords. The parser 300 of the preferred
embodiment is data-independent. In other words, it is not aware of
any files or databases. Therefore, the parser 300 must be
initialized with lists, projects, contacts, and keywords. The
initialization process usually occurs during the boot time of the
application that uses the parser 300, or when the application
switches to another set of data. The following pseudo code
illustrates a typical initialization of the parser 300 of the
preferred embodiment:
[0095] declare list, project, contact, keyword as strings for every
list in database
[0096] AddList(list)
[0097] for every project in object database
[0098] AddProject(project)
[0099] for every contact in object database
[0100] AddContact(contact)
[0101] for every keyword in object database
[0102] AddKeyword(keyword, list, project, contact)
[0103] After this initialization, the parser 300 knows about all
the lists, projects, contacts, and keywords. It is now able to
correctly auto-fill, parse, and suggest keywords upon request from
the client. Of course, the parser 300 must be kept in
synchronization with the data in the object database 850; changes
in the object database 850 should be reflected in the parser 300.
Updates are accomplished using Add, Delete, and Rename function
calls. As an example, consider the following situation: a user
deletes an existing project named "Paint Fence". The application
removes the project from the object database 850 and removes (or
updates) its associated keywords. This change must be reflected in
the parser 300 and can be done with a single function call as
follows:
[0104] DeleteProject("Paint Fence");
[0105] This single function call will remove the project and any
references to it from the parser 300. The project name will no
longer auto-complete and all of the keywords that are associated
with the "Paint Fence" project will be automatically removed or
updated. Note that DeleteProject(), AddProject(), and
RenameProject() return values indicating success or failure of the
function. For the sake of simplicity, the previous examples ignore
the return values.
[0106] The Rename functions support renaming of lists, projects,
contacts, and keywords. Renaming a list ("list" is used as an
example--it can be replaced by "project" or "contact") is easily
done in the object database 850. It is effectively a simple
database update operation. Because the list has a primary key in
the object database 850, and the keywords that are associated with
the list are related to the list via this key (rather than the
list's name), modifying the name of the list will not affect its
associated keywords. In other words, the keywords will remain
linked to the list after the name change.
[0107] The Rename functions of the preferred embodiment are as
follows:
[0108] BOOL WINAPI EXPORT RenameList(const char FAR* sOldList,
const char FAR* sNewList);
[0109] BOOL WINAPI EXPORT RenameProject(const char FAR*
sOldProject, const char FAR* sNewProject);
[0110] BOOL WINAPI EXPORT RenameContact(const char FAR*
sOldContact, const char FAR* sNewContact);
[0111] BOOL WINAPI EXPORT RenameKeyword(const char FAR*
sOldKeyword, const char FAR* sNewKeyword);
[0112] A single function call to any of the above functions will
handle the entire renaming process, and will simplify the client's
task
Retrieving Results From The Parser
[0113] In order to retrieve information from the parser 300, a
client must allocate buffers and pass them into the parser 300 DLL
via function calls. Parsing information is retrieved using the
ParseOutput Data Structure 830, which is defined as follows:
[0114] typedef struct_ParseOutput{
[0115] char sList[BUFFER_SIZE};
[0116] char sProject[BUFFER_SIZE];
[0117] char sContact[BUFFER_SIZE];
[0118] char sDelegate[BUFFER_SIZE];
[0119] char sDate[BUFFER_SIZE];
[0120] char sTimeBegin[BUFFER_SIZE];
[0121] char sTimeEnd[BUFFER_SIZE];
[0122] char sDateEnd[BUFFER_SIZE];
[0123] long nFrequency;
[0124] BYTE bRecurring;
[0125] BYTE nUnits;
[0126] BYTE nweekdays;
[0127] BYTE nWeekdayPos;
[0128] }ParseOutput, *ParseOutputPtr;
[0129] The client of the parser 300 DLL allocates a ParseOutput
data structure ("struct" or "type" in Visual Basic), and passes it
along with the input expression to be parsed using any of the
following function calls:
[0130] Pase()
[0131] DateParse()
[0132] Keyword suggestions are retrieved from the parser 300 using
the KeywordSuggestion structure, defined as follows:
[0133] typedef struct_KeywordSuggestion{
[0134] char sKeyword1[BUFFER_SIZE];
[0135] char sKeyword2[BUFFER_SIZE];
[0136] char sKeyword3[BUFFER_SIZE];
[0137] }Keyword Suggestion, *KeywordSuggestionPtr,
[0138] The client of the parse DLL allocates a KeywordSuggestion
data structure, and passes it along with an input expression using
any of the following function calls:
[0139] SuggestListKeywords()
[0140] SuggestProjectKeywords()
[0141] SuggestContactKeywords()
[0142] Auto-completion (auto-fill) requires only a character buffer
which can be deared by the client as:
[0143] char sBuffer[BUFFER_SIZE];
[0144] in C or C++, or
[0145] Dim sBuffer As string * BUFFER_SIZE
[0146] in Visua Basic. The buffer, along with the expression to be
completed, is then passed into any of the following function
calls:
[0147] AutoFillList()
[0148] AutoFillProject()
[0149] AutoFillContact()
Handling Recurring Dates
[0150] The present invention supports recurring date parsing by use
of the following fields of the Parse Output Data Structure. These
fields are:
2 nFrequency: Long. Null value = 0. "five days "-> nFrequency =
5. nUnits: BYTE. Null value = 0. DAYS = 1, WEEKS = 2, MONTHS = 3,
YEARS = 4. nWeekdays: BYTE. Null value = 0. SUN = 1, MON = 2, TUE =
4, WED = 8, THU = 16, FRI = , SAT = 64. All possible combinations
of weekdays can be stored. For example, Sat and Sun = 64 + 1 = 65.
Mon, Tues, and Wed = 14. To find out if nWeekdays includes a
specific weekday, simply "bitwise and" that weekday with nWeekdays
(& operator in C/C++, "and" operator in Visual Basic). If the
result of the bitwise operation is zero, then the weekday is not
included in n Weekdays; otherwise, it is. nWeekdayPos: BYTE. Null
Value = 0.1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, or 5th weekday of a given month.
Thus, "the second Monday of July" would imply that nWeekdayPos =
2.
[0151] Finally, a boolean value is provided to signal whether we
are dealing with a simple date or a recurring date:
3 bRecurring: BYTE. False = 0. True = anything else. If bRecurring
= True, sDate serves as the starting date of the recurring
event.
[0152] The parser 300 doesn't require end dates. That is, recurring
events are assumed to go on "forever" (the user must use the user
interface 200 to specify a full range). The "sEndDate" field in the
ParseOutput data structure, is nonetheless provided to support
specified end dates. A starting date, however, is always provided
when a recurring date is parsed. Although the parser 300 doesn't
require starting dates (i.e., every Friday starting on Aug. 8,
1997), it always tries to guess (intelligently) a starting date for
the recurring event. This starting date will be passed via the
ParseOutput struct in the sDate field.
Collaboration
[0153] Collaboration support is provided in the preferred
embodiment of the present invention. The parser 300 looks for two
possibilities at the beginning of each keynote. Note that other
similar keywords triggering collaboration could also be
provided.
[0154] The word "please" (or "pls") immediately followed by a
contact keyword.
[0155] A contact keyword immediately followed by the word "please"
(or "pls").
[0156] The parser 300 also accepts a single or multiple punctuation
(comma, period, colon, and semicolon) between the contact keyword
and the word "please" (e.g., "Brian. Please . . . " or "Please,
Brian . . . ").
[0157] When the parser 300 recognizes this keynote sequence, parser
300 fills the sDelegate field of the ParseOutput data structure
with the contact name (pointed to by the contact keyword). The next
contact keyword (if any) will appear in the sContact field. For
example, consider the two contacts, "Brian Smith" (keyword="brian")
and "Danny Jones" (keyword="danny"). The input expression:
[0158] "Brian,please call Danny and arrange for all of us to go to
lunch tomorrow at 2 pm"will result in the following ParseOutput
data structure fields:
[0159] sDate=<tomorrows date>
[0160] sTimeBegin=14:0
[0161] sDelegate="Brian Smiga"
[0162] sContact="Danny Rabbani"
[0163] Further details on collaboration support of the present
invention are provided in a subsequent section this document.
Object Database
[0164] The object database 850 of the present invention supports
arbitrary association of one type of object in the database with
one or more other objects of any type. The object database 850 also
supports collaboration (including negotiation and tracking action
requests to completion) between two users of the present invention
who may or may not share a common server.
[0165] Referring now to FIGS. 15-18, various tables maintained
within object database 850 are shown. Note that the table keys are
shown only for illustrative purposes.
Types of Objects
[0166] FIG. 15 shows the object type table of the preferred
embodiment. There are several types of objects currently supported
in the database of the present invention. A representative portion
of these types of objects are shown in FIG. 15 along with a
description of the type of the particular object in the preferred
embodiment. Because the object types are stored in a table in the
object database 850, an object type can be added, deleted, or
modified at run time. This is useful for supporting user-defined
types of information or objects (e.g., a "GPS Location").
Association of Object Types to Tables Where They Reside
[0167] Every type of object listed in FIG. 15 is stored in the
object database 850 in one of several tables. The association
between the object type the table in which it resides is retained
in the object association table shown in FIG. 16. As the object
association table shown in FIG. 16 illustrates, multiple types of
objects may be associated with--and thus actually stored in--the
same tables. For example, the object types of Person, Delegate,
FYI, and Attached Person are all associated with the "People"
table.
Object links Table
[0168] The links table of the preferred embodiment is a special
table in the database of the present invention that allows free
association of one object of any type to another object of any
type. For example, the links table allows the present invention to
associate a Person object type to an Email Address object type.
Note that the same Person could also be associated with additional
email addresses, each represented in the Links table as separate
entries.
[0169] Referring to FIG. 18, a sample link table is illustrated. As
shown, the columns (structure) of the link table includes the
specification of a two keys and two object types: key 1, type 1,
key 2, and type 2.
[0170] Every object in the object database 850 of the present
invention has a unique identifier, or key, associated with the
object. These keys are stored as part of the record, or entry,
describing an object in a particular table. For example, Brian
Smiga is an instance of a Person object type with a key of 101;
Brian's first name and last name, as well as his object instance
key, will be stored directly in the People table as part of a
single record.
[0171] As indicated previously, every object in the database of the
present invention also has a type associated with it. Given the
object key and object type of one object and the key and type of
another object, the two objects may be "linked" via a single entry
(record) in the links table, a sample of which is shown in FIG.
18.
[0172] For example, if "Brian Smiga" represents an instance of a
Person object type with a key 101 and "smiga@actioneer.com"
represents an instance of a corresponding Email Address with a key
102, the "Brian Smiga" object instance may be linked to his
corresponding "smiga@actioneer.com" email address instance in the
link table as follows:
4 Key 1 Type 1 Key 2 Type 2 101 5 102 13
[0173] where a Person object type has a key 5 and an Email object
type has a key 13. The above example of a links table entry
indicates that Brian Smiga (key=101) of type Person (5) is
associated to (i.e. linked to) smiga@actioneer.com (102) of type
Email Address (13). In the preferred embodiment, entries are always
stored in the links table such that the value of Type 1 is less
than or equal to the value of Type 2. This table organization aids
in searching.
Sample Database Representation
[0174] Referring now to FIG. 17, an example illustrates the
organization and use of the various tables in the object database
850 of the present invention. The columns shown for each table are
only a subset of the columns actually in the database of the
present invention. For example, Projects also have an associated
Outcome (goal), which would be saved in a separate column in the
Projects table. Additional information about a project might be
entered in another table, such as Simple Date (which would include
the start, due, and completion dates for the project), and linked
to the associated Project via the links table as described above.
Additional information about any of the contacts in the Contacts
table might be entered in a Physical Address table, the Email
Address table, etc. and linked to the associated Person via the
links table as described above. Note that in the table
representations illustrated in FIG. 17 and 18, the italicized
columns showing descriptions of the linked items do not actually
appear in the database of the preferred embodiment. Rather, they
are shown here for purposes of clarification in this patent
application.
[0175] Given the initial database table content shown in FIG. 17,
suppose a user named "Dennis Buchheim", creates a keynote by
entering a text expression into a keynote region 220, the sample
keynote reading as follows:
[0176] "Brian, please call Jim tomorrow re patent status"
[0177] Further suppose the user attaches the Person "Jim Salter"
and the Project "Patents", also sending an FYI keynote to Tom Hagan
as described in detail above. In this example, the parser 300 of
the present invention will automatically determine many of the
links that need to be established in the tables shown in FIG. 17:
keyword "Brian" will be recognized as a keyword linked to "Brian
Smiga," who is a Delegate of the keynote; keyword "call" will be
recognized as a keyword linked to the "Calls" list; keyword "Jim"
will be recognized as a keyword linked to the contact person "Jim
Salter"; "tomorrow" will be recognized as meaning Feb. 8, 1997 (or
whatever the current date is plus one day); and "patent" will be
recognized as a keyword linked to the "Patents" Project. The
remaining links will be determined by the user interface 200, in
which the new keynote was created.
[0178] Once the new keynote is filed by user Dennis, the following
significant data will be recorded in the object database 850 by the
present invention:
[0179] An envelope (Type=0) will be added as a container for the
keynote being sent to a delegate person. The Envelope includes such
data as a subject for the note, when the note was used, or when it
is received in a standard email client. Assume that this Envelope
was assigned a database key of 212 by the object database 850.
[0180] A List Item (Type=1) will be added for the note and would
read "Brian, please call Jim tomorrow re patent status". Assume
that this List Item was assigned a key of 213 by the object
database 850.
[0181] Several link table entries would be created for the new
keynote in this example. The sample link table resulting from this
sample input keynote is shown in FIG. 18. These entries in the
links table (and one or two less significant additional entries) as
shown are sufficient to describe the note that was entered as an
example.
[0182] It will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art
that the object database 850 implementation of the present
invention as described herein is of broader applicability than
strictly for use with the natural language passer 300 as described
herein. In an alternative embodiment, the input text data may be
provided as a structured record or buffer from which the object
database 850 extracts the information necessary to create the link
table shown by example in FIG. 18.
Collaboration Between Two Or More Users Of The Present System
[0183] The present system allows a user to manage his or her own
actions/projects and time more effectively. In many cases
actions/projects have to be handled by more than one person. The
collaboration cycle described below allows interaction between
users to further completion of actions/projects and to allow
information to be efficiently exchanged between users of the
present system.
[0184] FIG. 1, described above, illustrates a typical data
processing system upon which one embodiment of the present
invention is implemented. It is understood that the present
invention utilizes at least one instance of the system, for the
originator of the action request. In one embodiment, the
communication device 125, described above, allows the users to
collaborate as will be described below. Alternatively, the computer
systems of users may be directly coupled. Alternatively, multiple
users may be using the same computer system.
[0185] In addition to parsing input text, the parser 300, described
above, further utilizes the keywords to "classify" the text
entered. In one embodiment, the message types are shared and
personal. Shared messages include: FYI and action requests.
Personal messages include personal action and personal memo. Of
course, other message types may be utilized.
[0186] An action request is input text which is sent out to at
least one other person, and requires a response. It generally asks
another user to do something. In one embodiment, the keyword
"please" may initiate an action request. As discussed above, other
keywords may be added to the list, at the user's discretion. For
example, a user may add the keywords "I need you to", "pls", or
similar words to indicate that the text entered is an action
request. Thus, the sentence "Joe, I need you to call Bill about the
Project X deadline" is classified as an action request, targeted at
Joe. The contact is Bill, and the project is Project X. There is no
date, since the requester did not indude a date. Such analysis may
be done using the parsing methods described above. However, the
present system is not limited to the parsing method described
above. Other methods of identifying the target, contact, project
and date may be utilized.
[0187] An FYI, or "for your information," is input text that is
sent out to at least one other person, and requires no response. It
is used to inform others about facts. For example, and FYI might be
used to inform others that a new manager has been brought in.
Keywords for an FYI type may be "FYI", "For your information",
"Please note", and any other keywords which the user included in
the keyword list. Generally, the targets of the FYI are deduced
from the proximity to the keyword. For example, an FYI which read
"John, FYI, Tom is in charge of Project X now." would send a copy
of this FYI to John.
[0188] A personal action/memo is text that is not sent to anyone.
The absence of the other keywords would indicate that an entry is
classified as a personal action/memo. For example, the input text
"Call Jim about Project X" is a personal action. It is filed in the
user's own system, as described above, but is not forwarded to
anyone else.
Framework For Collaboration
[0189] The present system may be implemented on a number of
different frameworks. FIG. 19 is a diagram of a client-server
system. The client server system consists of a server 1910, and a
plurality of clients 1920 connected to the server 1910. The server
1910 stores the information regarding the action requests sent
between users and the database(s) to support the interaction. This
assumes, and necessitates, the existence of a server in a
client-server system. In addition to being expensive and complex,
this limits collaboration to members of the limited group sharing
access to the server 2010. In other words, it is limited to a
closed loop of clients C1 . . . Cn 2020 who have access to the
server 1910. This means that the collaboration system can not be
used for interacting with individuals outside of the client-server
framework.
[0190] FIG. 20 is a diagram of a peer-to-peer distributed system. A
number of peers P1 . . . Pn 2030 are interconnected. The
peer-to-peer system allows any two peers to communicate over the
system, even if not directly linked. This distributed system model
parallels the Internet. Thus, any two individuals can communicate
using the peer-to-peer distributed system, as long as both
individuals have access to an e-mail address. In one embodiment,
the peer-to-peer distributed system can be expanded to include such
mechanisms as voice mail, personal digital assistants, and any
other mechanisms capable of receiving and/or sending messages.
[0191] The distributed peer-to-peer system enables communication
with users who do not utilize the present system. Thus, the present
system allows seamless integration of all action requests, and
to-do-lists, regardless of whether the recipient is a subscriber to
the present system or not. In one embodiment, the peer-to-peer
distributed system model is used for the present invention.
Keeping Track of Action Requests
[0192] Utilizing a distributed system necessitates an alternative
means of keeping track of action requests. Because there is no
server which tracks each action request, a method of identifying
each action request and its associated objects, such as project,
sender, etc., is needed. This method enables the system to match
replies to the proper action request
[0193] In one embodiment, a foreign key table is utilized to keep
track of action requests. To clarify, the example described above
with respect to FIG. 15-18, is continued. The action request in
question was:
5 Delegate: Brian From: Dennis FYI: Tom Subj.: Action Request:
Please Brian, call Jim . . . Encl.: Project Information, Contact
Information Text: Please Brian, call Jim re: patent project.
[0194] The format of the action request does not reflect the actual
format of the action request displayed on the present system. The
appearance of such an action request is described below. This
action request was entered by Dennis, and sent to Brian. In
addition, an FYI copy of the action request was sent to Tom. This
is to alert Tom to the action request. When the action request is
generated, an envelope is generated, to contain the action request.
The envelope includes a subject, and links to the list item, as
well as the e-mail addresses of recipients. Below, only the actions
occurring in Brian's system are described. However, similar
activity occurs in Tom's system.
[0195] When Brian receives the action request, several Link table
entries are created for the new action request. These Link table
entries parallel the entries in Dennis' table, described above.
Since the local key numbers are unique to the database of the
individual, these key numbers may be different. In addition,
Brian's system generates a number of entries into a Foreign Key
table. The Foreign Key table is utilized in mapping a collaborative
action request in one database, part of the sender's system, to the
same action request in another database, part of the recipient's
system. This link is represented by associating the Envelopes
containing the corresponding List Items.
6TABLE 1 Local Foreign Creator Database Local Key Database Foreign
Key SMTP Brian's Brian's Received Dennis' Dennis' Sent Database ID
envelope key Database ID envelope key (212) SMTP Brian's Brian's
key for note Dennis' "me" key Database ID creator (Dennis) Database
ID for Dennis SMTP Brian's Brian's key for Dennis' "my e-mail"
Database ID creator's e-mail Database ID key for address (Dennis)
Dennis SMTP Brian's "me" key for Brian Dennis' Dennis' key Database
ID Database ID for delegate (Brian) SMTP Brian's "my e-mail" key
for Dennis' Dennis' key Database ID Brian Database ID for
delegate's e-mail address (Brian) SMTP Brian's Brian's key for
Dennis' Dennis' key Database ID linked person (Jim) Database ID for
linked person (Jim) SMTP Brian's Brian's key for FYI Dennis'
Dennis' key Database ID recipient's e-mail Database ID for FYI
address (Tom) recipient's e-mail address (Tom) SMTP Brian's Brian's
key for Dennis' Dennis' key Database ID linked project Database ID
for linked (Patents) project (Patents) SMTP Brian's Brian's key for
Dennis' Dennis' key Database ID sender Database ID for sender SMTP
Brian's Brian's key for Dennis' Dennis' key Database ID sender
e-mail Database ID for sender e-mail
[0196] The creator column is the creator of the entries in the
Foreign Key table. The creator column displays the device which
received the action request. In this example, it was the simple
mail transfer protocol (SMTP) plug-in which received the action
request from Dennis.
[0197] The Local Database column contains a unique identifier
identifying the delegate's (Brian's) database. The Foreign Database
column contains a unique identifier identifying the requester's
(Dennis') database. In one embodiment, the identifier is a Globally
Unique Identifier (GUID), which is a 128-bit value based on the
Ethernet address of the machine on which the GUID is generated, as
well as the time at which the GUID was created. Alternatively,
other unique identifiers may be utilized.
[0198] The Local Key and Foreign Key are the key numbers from the
Database tables of the individuals. The example keys described
above with respect to FIG. X are included in the Foreign Key table,
i.e. Dennis' database entries. For example, the local key for note
creator (Dennis) is the key number associated with Dennis in
Brian's database. The "me" key is a special purpose value utilized
because the user's database may or may not contain information
identifying the user himself or herself, and it is unreliable to
match user names via text comparison. This method allows for a
match to be indicated. The "my e-mail" key is a similar key for the
e-mail address of the database owner. Additionally, a parallel
table is generated in Dennis' system when Dennis receives a reply
from Brian. Of course, in Dennis' system, Dennis' database ID is
the Local Database, while Brian's is the Foreign Database.
[0199] Foreign Key entries are also created on both sides
(requester and delegate) for the Person and Project linked to the
action request, as well as the Creator (another Person) of the
action request, the Sender (another Person) of the action request,
the Delegate, and any Email Address associated with the action
request. The Person, Project, etc. entries are created to ensure
that the correct links are created/maintained on reply and that
duplicate entries are not created in any user's database.
[0200] In an alternative embodiment, the e-mail addresses of the
sender and the recipient, coupled with a unique identification
attached to the action request itself identifies the action
request. In another alternative embodiment, a unique local
identification coupled with a public key/private key identification
of the sender/recipient is utilized to identify each action
request.
Collaboration Cycle
[0201] FIG. 21 is a flowchart illustrating an overview of the
present invention. At block 2100, the present collaboration cycle
starts. It is initiated by a requester sending a message to a
delegate or delegates.
[0202] At block 2110, there is collaboration between the systems of
the requester and delegate or delegates. This collaboration
involves a complex series of negotiation steps that are designed to
arrive at a final answer. This is described in more detail
below.
[0203] At block 2120, the process queries whether the final answer
is affirmative or negative, or done. An affirmative answer occurs
when the parties agree to perform the task. A negative answer
occurs when the parties decide to not perform the task.
[0204] If the final answer is affirmative, the process continues to
block 2130. At block 2130, the final answer is filed in the
appropriate calendars and lists, including lists associated with
contact, project, if appropriate. These lists will be referred to
hereinafter as project/contact list. Where it is filed depends on
the interpretation of the original action request, and the
collaboration process, as described below.
[0205] If the final answer is negative, the process continues to
block 2140. At block 2140, the action request, and collaborative
updates of the original action request are deleted from the
calendar and lists. This process is further described below.
[0206] At one point, unless a negative reply was received, the
delegate sends a Done reply to the requester. A Done reply may be
sent by the delegate using the process described below.
Alternatively, when the delegate checks the action/project off his
or her calendar and/or project/contact lists, an automatic Done
reply may be generated and sent to the requester.
[0207] When the requester receives the Done reply, the original
action request is marked done in the requester's system.
Additionally, in one embodiment, an automatic acknowledgment form
is generated. In one embodiment, an acknowledgment form consists of
a generic text, such as "Thank you for completing my action request
regarding the `Project name` project." In one embodiment, different
types of acknowledgments may be associated with different
delegates. For example, the requester may identify certain
delegates that should receive a thank you voice mail, or document.
In those instances, such an acknowledgment may be automatically
generated by the system. In one embodiment, the user may select the
type of acknowledgment. In one embodiment, the requester only
receives a notification that an acknowledgment should be sent.
[0208] FIG. 22A is a flowchart illustrating the collaboration cycle
as viewed by the originator, or requester. The process starts at
block 2200, when an input text has been parsed, and classified as
an action request. In one embodiment, this occurs when the parser
detects the keyword such as "please".
[0209] At block 2205, the process identifies the delegate. An
action request can be addressed to one or more parties. These
parties are the delegate. As described above, in one embodiment,
the names prior to, or following, the keyword "please" are
generally considered the delegate. As described above, the user may
have added additional keywords which indicate that the present
entry is an action request.
[0210] The delegate may be an individual or a group. For example,
an action request could be addressed to "managers". In that
instance, the keyword "manager" could indude a plurality of
managers. In one embodiment, for multiple delegates, separate
action requests are spawned for each delegate, and each delegate is
dealt with individually. For simplicity's sake, the remainder of
this flowchart will assume that there is only a single
delegate.
[0211] In one embodiment, a header is generated when the delegate
is identified. In one embodiment, the header includes a number of
fields. In one embodiment, these fields include: Delegate, FYI, and
Endosures. The Delegate field includes the delegates, which are
determined as described above. The FYI field is determined in a
similar way. In one embodiment, the Delegate field maps to the To
field, the FYI maps to the CC field in other messaging
applications.
[0212] The Enclosures field enables the requester to attach a
variety of items to the action request. In one embodiment, the
enclosures may include arbitrary files or information about the
projects and the contacts related to the action request This is
especially useful when an action request is sent to a delegate who
is not using the present system. In that instance, the message
received by the delegate may not be linked to database(s) with
information about contacts or projects. Thus, by attaching those
items, the requester can simplify the recipients' work.
[0213] The requester's name is placed in the From: field. The
header may also include a subject. The subject may be the first few
words of the action request, the project to which the entry was
parsed, or may be entered by the author of the action request. In
one embodiment, the subject appears as "Action Request: <first
few words of request>," or "FYI: <first few words of
FYI>." This makes apparent to the recipient the type of message
received, in addition to giving some information about the subject
matter of the message. At block 2210, the action request is sent to
the delegate. The action request may be sent via electronic mail or
any other means. In one embodiment, the action request is sent
directly to the delegate's in-box in the system of the present
invention. In one embodiment, if the delegate is not utilizing the
present system, the action request is sent to the delegate's
address. In one embodiment, his may include the delegate's e-mail
address, fax number, voice email number, or pager.
[0214] Much of the filing and similar actions described in the
present application require the use of the system of the present
invention. However, action requests may be sent to any individual
who has a receiver object, which can receive text or voice in some
format. In one embodiment, if the delegate does not have an e-mail
connection, the action request can be faxed to the delegate. In one
embodiment, the present system may format the action request in a
rich text format (RTF) and fax it to the delegate. In one
embodiment, the action request may be turned into a voice mail
message and sent by the present system. In another embodiment, the
action request may be sent as a pager message to a pager.
[0215] In one embodiment, the action request is formatted into an
ASCII format, which is readable by a user. In one embodiment, the
action request is reformatted to read as follows:
[0216] "Text of the original action request."
[0217] This is an Action Request for "Delegate" from
"Requester".
[0218] It relates to:
7 Project: "Project" Contact: "Contact" Due Date: "Due Date"
Attachments: "Enclosures"
[0219] The text in quotation marks is inserted based on the
information from the action request. This text format is sent, and
is readable by delegates who are not subscribers to the present
system.
[0220] At block 2215, the action request is filed, and penciled
into the appropriate calendars and/or project/contact lists. In one
embodiment, the action request is filed in the "Waiting For" list.
This is a list which contains action requests which have not been
resolved. In one embodiment, a copy of the action request is also
filed in the project/contact list to which it was parsed.
Additionally, if appropriate, the action request is penciled into
any lists, projects, contacts, and calendars that it was parsed to.
"Penciling" indicates entry into a calendar or project/contact list
in a different color. This allows the user to easily identify items
which are not yet agreed upon. In one embodiment, penciled items
appear in gray, compared to normal entries in black or blue.
[0221] At block 2220, the process waits for a reply from the
delegate. The process does not remain in a wait state, but rather
continues to execute other processes. However, this action request
cycle waits for completion. When the reply from the delegate is
received, the process continues to block 2225. The reply from the
delegate appears in the in-box of the requester. In one embodiment,
if there is no reply a reminder is sent before the due date.
[0222] At block 2225, the process queries whether the reply is
affirmative, negative, or an other category. These categorizations
are described below with respect to FIG. 22B. In one embodiment,
the reply list is selected by the delegate by selecting from a
preset selection or replies. In an alternate embodiment, the reply
is reparsed to determine the appropriate reply list. In one
embodiment, the date is reparsed. In an alternate embodiment, all
of the reply is reparsed and reclassified.
[0223] If the reply is affirmative, the process continues to block
2230. At block 2230, the original action request is updated and
refiled. As described above, the action request is originally in
the Waiting For list. Now, the action request is recategorized to
the appropriate list, as determined from the parsing. The action
request is also placed into the calendars and project/contact lists
in ink. In one embodiment, writing in ink comprises entering the
request in a different color from penciling. In one embodiment, ink
is a black or blue color.
[0224] If the reply is negative, the process continues to block
2235. At block 2235, the action request is deleted from the
calendar and from the Waiting For category. At this point, the
process is closed, since the delegate has refused to complete the
request. However, the negative reply remains in the in-box of the
delegate. Thus, if the requester wishes to reassign the project, he
or she can do so using the copy in the in-box.
[0225] If the reply is other, the process continues to block 2240.
At block 2240, the requester and delegate negotiate. The
negotiation process is described in more detail with respect to
FIG. 23. When the negotiation is completed, the process continues
to block 2245. At block 2245, the process once again queries
whether the final answer is an affirmative or negative. If the
final answer is affirmative, the process returns to block 2230. If
the final answer is negative, the process returns to block
2235.
[0226] FIG. 22B is a flowchart illustrating the collaboration cycle
as viewed by the recipient, or delegate. At block 2250, a copy of
the received action request is placed in the delegate's in-box. In
one embodiment, the in-box is a part of the present system. In an
alternative embodiment, the in-box may be the e-mail box of the
delegate. In one embodiment, if the delegate is not a user of the
present system, the in-box is the delegate's e-mail address box. In
one embodiment, the in-box is also a list in the present system,
into which received action requests are placed.
[0227] At block 2250, the opened action request is displayed to the
delegate. In one embodiment, if the delegate is using the present
system, the action request is displayed in the format described
above, with respect to FIG. 4. If the delegate is not using the
present system, in one embodiment the delegate can open the action
request as an e-mail message. If the delegate opens the present
invention as an e-mail, it appears as plain or formatted text,
which is human readable. The format of the text is as it appears
above. In an alternative embodiment, if the delegate opens the
information in any format that permits linking, enclosures are
linked to the text. In one embodiment, if the delegate opens the
action request in a Web browser, it appears in hypertext markup
language (HTML) format. In one embodiment, enclosures appear at the
bottom of the document. In one embodiment, in HTML, enclosures may
be linked to the appropriate information in the text. For example,
if the requester enclosed the contact information, the contact name
is linked to that enclosure. Thus, when the delegate selects the
contact name, the enclosed contact information is displayed. Other
means of displaying text are well known in the art.
[0228] Once the action request has been opened, the delegate may
further delegate the action request. Of course, if the delegate is
not using the present system, he or she can not do this, except
through standard e-mail communication. At this point, in one
embodiment, the user can further delegate the action request by
adding a "Please `new delegate`" to the action request This, in
reparsing, directs the action request to the new delegate. In an
alternative embodiment, the user can manually select a new delegate
in the header, and thereby forward the action request. The action
request is readdressed to the new delegate, and sent on. The
original delegate becomes a requester at this point. However, the
original delegate is still has to respond to the original
requester.
[0229] At block 2260, the user is prompted to enter a reply. In one
embodiment, when the user opens the action request in the in-box,
it appears with reply classification choices in a reply box on the
displayed action request. In one embodiment, the reply box is a
pull-down menu. In an alternate embodiment, the reply box includes
radio buttons, or other means of indicating one choice from a
number of listed items.
[0230] One of these choices can be selected by the user, as the
reply to the action request. In one embodiment these choices
include: Yes, Yes if, No, Comment, and Done. The Yes reply
indicates that the delegate accepts the delegation, and will
perform the action requested. A Yes if reply indicates that the
delegate is willing to perform the action requested, but is making
a counter-suggestion. For example, the counter suggestion may be to
change the meeting date. A No reply indicates that the delegate is
refusing the delegation. The Done reply indicates that the delegate
accepts the delegation, and has completed the project assigned. And
finally, the Comment reply indicates something outside of these
categories. For example, if the delegate feels that the requester
misunderstands the project, this reply may be utilized. Other reply
choices may be incorporated without changing the fundamental
purpose of the present invention. In one embodiment, these choices
appear when the delegate opens the action request in his or her
in-box. In one embodiment, the user must select one of these
choices. In an alternative embodiment, no such reply options
appear. In that embodiment, the user replies in a free-form text.
In that embodiment, a parser is used to parse the user's reply, and
fit it into one of the above categories.
[0231] When the user selects one of these choices, a reply form is
created. If the reply was either a Yes, No, or Done, the reply form
is complete. The user need not enter any further information.
However, the user may enter further information. In one embodiment,
if the reply is Yes, No or Done, a header is automatically added to
the reply, and it is automatically sent. The user is not prompted
for entry.
[0232] If, on the other hand, the choice selected is a Yes If or a
Comment, a reply form is automatically generated, with the
appropriate header information In one embodiment, if the reply was
Yes If, a phrase such as "Yes, I will do it, if" appears, followed
by the cursor. The user can then complete this phrase. In an
alternative embodiment, the user can delete the phrase and enter
his or her own words. In one embodiment, if the Comment button is
selected, the phrase such as "I have a comment," followed by the
cursor is displayed. Again, the user can either finish the phrase,
or erase it and write it differently. In this way, the reply format
is automatically filled in based on the reply choice selected.
[0233] At block 2265, the action request and reply are placed on
the appropriate project/contact lists and calendars of the
delegate. The information placed on the lists and calendars is
based on the parsed action request and parsed reply. In one
embodiment, only the date information is reparsed, and all other
information remains. When the delegate opens the action request,
preliminary project/contact list, contact, and other information is
indicated in the shadow of the action request, in parentheses.
However, the delegate can change this information, either directly
in the shadow, or by changing the information in the reply.
[0234] At block 2270, the reply is sent to the requester. In one
embodiment, this occurs when the user presses a button. In one
embodiment, there is a send button.
[0235] At block 2275, the process queries whether the just sent
reply was affirmative, a negative, or other. The affirmative reply
includes Yes and Done. The negative reply includes No. The Yes if
and Comment replies are classified as other. Similarly, if
different categories are utilized, any category which refuses the
delegation is negative. Any category which accepts the delegation,
without attempting to change it in any way is affirmative. Any
other categories are Other.
[0236] If the reply is affirmative, the process continues to block
2280. At block 2280, the original action request is updated and
filed. As described above, the original action request is on the
Out-box list of the delegate. At this point, the action request is
refiled based on the results of the parsing. The action request is
also placed into the appropriate calendars and lists in ink. In one
embodiment, placing the request in the calendar in ink comprises
entering the request in a different color from penciling. In one
embodiment, ink is a black or blue color. In one embodiment, a
notification of the reply remains in the requester's in-box. In
another embodiment, the user may select whether or not to receive
notification.
[0237] If the reply is a negative, the process continues to block
2285. At block 2285, the action request is deleted from the
calendar and from the Waiting For category. At this point, the
request is closed, since the delegate has refused to complete the
request. In one embodiment, a notification of the reply remains in
the requester's in-box. In another embodiment, the user may select
whether or not to receive notification.
[0238] If the reply is Other, the process continues to block 2290.
At block 2290, the requester and delegate negotiate. The
negotiation process is described in more detail with respect to
FIG. 23. When the negotiation is completed, the process continues
to block 2295. At block 2295, the process once again queries
whether the final answer is affirmative or negative. If the final
answer is affirmative, the process returns to block 2280. If the
final answer is negative, the process returns to block 2285.
[0239] FIG. 23 is an illustration of the negotiation process. The
negotiation is initiated at block 2240 and 2290, as described
above. If the requester and delegate do not come to an agreement
during the initial exchange of messages, they segue into the
negotiation process.
[0240] At block 2310, the negotiation process starts. At block
2320, the recipient of the last message is prompted for a reply.
The negotiation process is entered when the delegate returns a
reply which is either a "Yes, if" or a "Comment," or any other
reply which is not affirmative or negative.
[0241] Thus, in the first iteration, at block 2320, the requester
is prompted for a reply, in response to the delegate's initial
reply. The reply form that appears before the requester is very
similar to the reply form for the delegate. In one embodiment, the
categories that may be selected are: OK, OK If, No, Withdraw/Done,
and Comment. These categories parallel the categories of Yes, Yes
If, No, Done and Comment. The category names may be changed without
affecting the present process. The OK reply means that the
requester accepts the change or comment proposed by the delegate.
An OK If reply is a counterproposal by the requester. A No is a
rejection of the delegate's proposal. A Withdraw is notification of
the delegate that the original action request is being canceled,
and the delegate no longer has to do anything in connection with
the action request. An OK is classified as affirmative. A No or
Withdraw is classified as a negative. And OK If and Comment are
classified as Other. In an alternative embodiment, the reply form
does not contain any categories. In that embodiment, the user
enters a free-form reply A parser is used to parse the reply, and
determine the reply choice into which it belongs.
[0242] As described above, with respect to blocks 2270 and 2320,
based on the reply choice selected, a preformatted reply appears,
along with the appropriate header information. This simplifies the
negotiation process. At block 2330, the reply is sent and a copy of
the reply is placed in the appropriate calendars and
project/contact lists. The message is also appropriately updated in
light of the reply just sent.
[0243] At block 2340, the process tests whether the reply just sent
was an affirmative, negative or other. As described in the above
dassification, a delegate's Yes, Done, and a requester's OK are
classified as an affirmative. The delegate's No, and the
requester's No or Withdraw is classified as a negative. All other
answers, i.e. Yes If, OK If, and Comment, are classified as other.
Either an affirmative or a negative answer is a final answer. That
is, it is a conclusion to the negotiation. If the answer was either
affirmative or negative, the process continues to block 2350. At
block 2350, the negotiation process terminates.
[0244] If, at block 2340, the answer was found to be Other, the
process continues to block 2360 At block 2360, the process tests
whether there is an auto-terminate that is activated. In one
embodiment, the auto-terminate is an option which a requester can
select. The auto-terminate automatically ends the negotiation
process after a preset number of exchanges. In one embodiment, the
user enters the number of exchanges after which the negotiation
ends. For example, if the parties can not agree after five e-mail
exchanges, the process automatically terminates. This is a method
to avoid endless cycles of negotiation when it is apparent that the
parties can not agree.
[0245] If the auto-termination process is not activated, the
process returns to block 2320, and prompts the recipient of the
last message for a reply. For example, if the last message was
written by the requester to the delegate, the process prompts the
delegate to respond to the message.
[0246] If, on the other hand, the auto-termination process is
activated, at block 2360, the process continues to block 2370. At
block 2370, the final answer is set to a No. This indicates that no
agreement was reached between the requester and the delegate. The
process then continues to block 2350, where the negotiation process
terminates.
[0247] FIG. 24 is a flowchart illustrating the distribution of an
FYI. As discussed above, an FYI is sent out by an originator to at
least one recipient. In one embodiment, an action request may be
also sent as an FYI to other users. The FYI does not require a
reply. In one embodiment, an FYI recipients may answer.
[0248] At block 2410, the process starts. This occurs when a user
enters information started with a keyword which indicates that the
data entered is an FYI. The FYI is parsed, as described above. At
block 2420, the FYI is filed in the system of the originator.
[0249] At block 2430, the recipient or recipients are identified.
In one embodiment, the name, names, or group names which appear
next to the keyword indicating that this is an FYI are identified
as the recipient(s). At block 2440, headers are added to the FYI.
The header contains the To: field, From: field, cc: field,
enclosures: field, and a subject field. These header entries are as
described above with respect to the action request.
[0250] At block 2450, the FYI is sent to the recipients. When the
recipients receive the FYI, they can open it and file it In one
embodiment, no option to distnbuted reply is provided. In this way,
no extraneous communication about information is encouraged.
[0251] FIGS. 25A and 25B are a flowchart illustrating an example of
the collaborative process. In this example, two people, Tom and
Dennis are trying to set up a meeting about a certain project.
Dennis is the requester, or originator.
[0252] At graphic 2500, Dennis is entering text As described above,
the text is being concurrently parsed. Thus, the project, contact,
date and appropriate project/contact list come up in the shadow
2515, as Dennis types in the action request 2512. As discussed
above, the parsing algorithm may be the algorithm described above,
or any other algorithm. In one embodiment, as Dennis is entering
the action request 2512, the parser is parsing the text. When the
keyword indicating that this is an action request is found, a
header is placed on the action request. The spaces in the header,
such as delegate, FYI, enclosures etc. are added as they are
determined by the parsing algorithm and Dennis' actions. In an
alternative embodiment, the action request 2512 is parsed only when
Dennis indicates that he has finished entering text When Dennis
finishes entering the action request, he sends it.
[0253] At graphic 2502, Tom has received the action request, and
opened it. The header 2425 that was automatically generated is
displayed. Underneath, the original action request 2530 is
displayed. Above the header, a reply block 2520 is displayed. The
reply block 2520 displays the possible reply options. In one
embodiment, the reply block 2520 is a drop-down list from which one
reply may be selected. In another embodiment, the reply block 2520
may be in any other format which allows the user to select a reply.
In this instance, the Yes If reply has been highlighted. For
contact and project information, suggestions derived from the
sender are provided to the recipient initially. In one embodiment,
the project name and contact name are in parentheses. This is to
indicate that the project and contact names may not be the same for
Tom as they were for Dennis. As described above, the keywords vary,
because each user can enter his or her own keywords.
[0254] At graphic 2504, Tom has selected the Yes If reply button
from the reply block 2520, and the reply 2545 is displayed. In one
embodiment, reply automatically starts with a "Yes, rll do it, if .
. ." The cursor is placed behind that phrase, enabling Tom to
complete the phrase. In this instance, Tom has completed the phrase
by typing "we can reschedule for Tuesday." The text entered by Tom
is differentiated by being placed in italics in this instance. It
is understood that in the actual application, the text need not be
differentiated in this way. In the shadow 2540, the project name
has been altered. This may be done manually by the user.
Alternatively, the process may parse the original note, using Tom's
databases and keyword lists. In this instance, the contact name
remained the same. However, the project name was changed. Each user
is responsible for naming his or her own projects, since two users
may refer to the same project by different names. At this point,
Tom may send the reply. At that point, a header is placed on the
reply, and it is sent back to the requester, i.e., Dennis.
[0255] At graphic 2506, Dennis has received Tom's reply and opened
it. In the shadow 2560, the new date appears. Tom suggested a new
date for the meeting. Because the reply was reparsed for this
factor, the new date/time appears in the shadow 2560. Once again, a
reply box 2550 appears. Because Dennis is the requester, a slightly
different reply box 2550 appears. The entries are explained above,
with respect to FIG. 22B. In this instance, Dennis selected the Yes
button, agreeing to Tom's suggested date change. In one embodiment,
after Dennis selects the Yes button, the reply is automatically
sent by the system, and the user's involvement ends. A final answer
has been reached. Thus, the negotiation terminates.
[0256] At graphic 2508, Dennis' system files the finalized
information. In one embodiment, the finalized information is
displayed in a box showing the history of the communications
between the parties. The original shadow 2515 is updated to an
updated shadow 2570. The original penciled entries in Dennis'
calendars and lists are also updated to be in ink. This indicates
that an agreement was reached.
[0257] At graphic 2510, Tom's system files the finalized
information. Additionally, the original shadow 2535 is updated to a
new shadow 2585, containing the finally agreed upon information.
The original penciled entries in Brian's calendars and lists are
also updated to be in ink. This indicates that an agreement was
reached.
[0258] Thus, through this process, one instance of the present
invention has been illustrated in a graphical form. It is
understood that the actual screen displays may not be identical to
the displays illustrated in this Figure. In this way, the
interaction between a requester and a delegate is simplified. This
allows a delegate and a requester to arrive at a mutually
satisfactory way to complete actions/projects. It provides
sufficient flexibility for both parties, and works as an automated
conversation type of automated negotiation.
Parser DLL Application Programmer's Interface (API)
[0259] The following section describes in detail the parser 300 DLL
application programmmer's interface (API) in the preferred
embodiment of the present invention.
Sample Electronic Mail Message
[0260] The present invention can be used to receive and parse an
input keynote in the manner described above. In addition, the
present invention supports collaboration with other users, each of
whom may or may not have the functionality of the present
invention. Because a receiver of a keynote may not have the
functionality of the present invention, the present invention
automatically formats a conventional electronic mail message which
can be sent to a receiver or delagate of a keynote. Using the
parser 300 as described above, the present invention takes an input
keynote and builds the conventional electronic mail message from
information associated with keywords matched in the input keynote.
In addition, the present invention also builds a scripted (i.e.,
encoded) version of the electronic mail message. The scripted
version of the electronic mail message is formatted in a structured
form to allow a receiver or delagate of the keynote process the
message automatically if the receiver or delagate has the
functionality of the present invention. If the receiver or delagate
has the functionality of the present invention, the scripted
version of the keynote can be interpreted and automatically
processed as a keynote on the receiving end. Thus, the present
invention, by building an electronic message with both a
conventional text format and a scripted format combined in the same
automatically generated electronic message, allows keynote
collaboration with anyone on the receiving end of such an
electronic mail message.
[0261] The following sample automatically generated keynote
electronic mail message illustrates the dual format electronic
message structure automatically created by the present invention
given the following input keynote:
[0262] Jim, please add this sample KeyNote to the KeyNote/parser
patent tomorrow. Call Tom if you have questions. Thanks!
[0263] A sample electronic mail message produced by the present
invention from the above input keynote follows. The first portion
of the message below represents the conventional electronic mail
format (ASCII) readable by a receiver without the functionality of
the present invention. The second portion of the message starting
with the second occurance of the text string,
"--dreldbssbtdwrvkval" represents the scripted version of the
message which can be processed by a receiver with the functionality
of the present invention. Thus, this sample electronic mail message
illustrates the dual format electronic mail message generation
capability of the present invention. A further explanation of the
collaboration capability of the present invention is provided in a
later section of this patent application.
8 --begin sample electronic mail message-- This is a multipart
message in MIME format. --dreldbssbtdwrvkval <other content
transfer encoding type being used, probably quoted-printable or
7-bit> Jim, please add this sample KeyNote to the KeyNote/parser
patent tomorrow. Call Tom if you have questions. Thanks! This is an
ActionRequest for Jim Salter from Dennis Buchheim. It relates to:
Project: Patents Contact: Tom Hagan Due Date: 2/6/97 PROJECT
INFORMATION Name: Patents Due: 2/5/97 Outcome: Successfully defend
Actioneer's inventions. CONTACT INFORMATION Tom Hagan Chairman
Actioneer, Inc. 539 Bryant St. San Francisco, CA 94107 USA (415)
555-1212 (Work) hagan@actioneer.com (Internet) --dreldbssbtdwrvkval
<other content transfer encoding type being used, probably
quoted-printable or 7-bit> X-Keynote-Delegate: TRUE BEGIN: VCARD
X-Version: 1.0.0.0.0 X-Type: ENVELOPE X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 160 X-GUID:
00000000-0000-0000-0000-000000000000 X-ID: 0 X-Type: PERSON X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 1 X-Salutation: N:
Buchheim; Dennis X-MiddleName: X-Type: EMAIL_ADDR X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 2 X-EmailAddrType:
+//ISBN 1-887687-00-9::versit::PDI//INTERNET EMAIL; INTERNET:
buchheim X-List: 1 X-Type: PERSON X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 1 X-Salutation:
X-FamilyName: Buchheim X-GivenNazne: Dennis X-MiddleName: X-Type:
EMAIL_ADDR X-GUID: 1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 2
X-EmailAddrType: +//ISBN 1-887687-00-9::versit::PDI//INTERNET
EMAIL; INTERNET: buchheim X-List: 1 X-Type: EMAIL_ADDR X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 136 X-EMailAddrType:
+//ISBN 1-887687-00-9::versit::PDI//INTERNET EMAIL; INTERNET:
jim_salter@bstz.com X-List: 3 X-Type: EMAIL_ADDR X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 126 X-EmailAddrType:
+//ISBN 1-887687-00-9::versit::PDI//INT- ERNET EMAIL; INTERNET:
buchheim@actioneer.com X-Type: EMAIL_ADDR X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 151 X-EmailAddrType:
+//ISBN 1-887687-00-9::versit::PDI//INT- ERNET EMAIL; INTERNET:
hagan@actioneer.com X-Type: EMAIL_ADDR X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 143 X-EmailAddrType:
+//ISBN 1-887687-00-9::versit::PDI//INT- ERNET EMAIL; INTERNET:
judith_szepesi@bstz.com X-Type: LIST_ITEM X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 157 X-ItemType: ACTION
X-Complete: OPEN X-Collaboration: REQUESTOUT X-Priority: 0 X-List:
1 X-BodyText: Jim, please add this sample KeyNote to the
KeyNote/parser patent tomorrow. Call Tom if you have questions.
Thanks! X-List: 1 X-ReplyText: X-Date: 35466.812778 X-List: 1
X-Type: PERSON X-GUID: 1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID:
130 X-Salutation: X-FamilyName: Salter X-GivenName: Jim
X-MiddleName: X-List: 1 X-Type: PROJECT X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 153 X-ProjName: Patents
X-Outcome: Successfully defend Actioneer's inventions. X-Type:
SIMPLE_DATE X-GUID: 1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba- 3 X-ID:
156 X-DateType: REFONLY X-SimpleDate: -1,35466.000000,
35468.000000, 0.000000, 0.000000 X-List: 1 X-Type: PROJECT X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 153 X-ProjName: Patents
X-List: 1 X-Type: PERSON X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 144 X-Salutation:
X-FamilyName: Hagan X-GivenName: Tom X-MiddleName: ORG: Actioneer,
Inc.; TITLE: Chairman X-List: 1 X-Type: ADDRESS X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 152 X-AddrType: +//ISBN
1-887687-00-9::versit::PDI//WORK ADR:; ; 539 Bryant St.; San
Francisco; CA; 94107; USA X-List: 1 X-Type: PHONE X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 150 TEL; WORK: (415)
555-1212 X-List: 1 X-Type: EMAIL_ADDR X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 151 X-EmailAddrType:
+//ISBN 1-887687-00-9::versit::PDI//INTERNET EMAIL; INTERNET:
hagan@actioneer.com X-List: 1 X-Type: PERSON X-GUID:
1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 144 X-Salutation:
X-FamilyName: Hagan X-GivenName: Tom X-MiddleName: X-Type:
SIMPLE_DATE X-GUID: 1de904e1-7f86-11d0-b001-00c026303ba3 X-ID: 159
X-DateType: REFONLY X-SimpleDate: -1,35467.000000, 0.000000,
0.000000, 0.000000 END: VCARD --dreldbssbtdwrvkval-- --end of
sample electronic mail message--
[0264] Thus, a natural language based information organization and
collaboration tool for a computer system is described. Although the
invention has been descnied with respect to specific examples
herein, it will be apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art
that the invention is not limited to the use of specific examples
but may extend to other embodiments as well. The present invention
is intended to include all of these other embodiments as defined in
the following claims.
* * * * *