[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message]

RE: US Patent 6,687,897

• To: "'Michael Champion'" <mc@x...>,"'XML DEV'" <xml-dev@l...>
• Subject: RE: US Patent 6,687,897
• From: "Michael Kay" <michael.h.kay@n...>
• Date: Fri, 13 Feb 2004 12:27:51 -0000
• Importance: Normal
• In-reply-to: <E8C474DA-5DB0-11D8-8F58-000A95CCC59E@x...>
• Reply-to: <michael.h.kay@n...>

I find it completely bizarre that this kind of thing can get past the
"obviousness" test.

The US Patent Office is clearly not applying stringent enough criteria.
What I would like to know is, is it a conspiracy (protectionism for the
US software industry, jobs for the lawyers), or is it just incompetence?

Michael Kay


> Systems, methods and data structures for encompassing scripts 
> written  
> in  one or more scripting languages in a single file. The 
> scripts of a  
> computer system are organized into a single file using Extensible  
> Language  Markup (XML). Each script is delimited by a file 
> element and  
> the script's  instructions are delimited by a code element 
> within each  
> file element.  Other information, such as a name of the script and a  
> functional  description of the script may also be included in 
> the file  
> using other XML  elements to delimit that information. The 
> language in  
> which a particular  script is written is also included within 
> the XML  
> format. When a  particular script is executed, the file is parsed to  
> create a list of the  script names or of the functional 
> descriptions of  
> the scripts. One or more  scripts are selected and the code 
> for those  
> scripts is extracted from the  file and executed by the appropriate  
> scripting process. The scripting  process that executes a particular  
> script is identified from the scripting  extension attribute that is  
> included in the XML format of the file."
> 
> At very first glance, it appears to be another case of 
> "wrapping common  
> practice in XML tags makes it patentable".  Of course, there 
> could be  
> subtleties here that are more innovative than are apparent at first  
> glance, but needless to say it's hard to have any faith that 
> the USPTO  
> would be able to tell the difference.
> 
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------------
> The xml-dev list is sponsored by XML.org 
> <http://www.xml.org>, an initiative of OASIS 
<http://www.oasis-open.org>

The list archives are at http://lists.xml.org/archives/xml-dev/

To subscribe or unsubscribe from this list use the subscription
manager: <http://lists.xml.org/ob/adm.pl>

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: US Patent 6,687,897
    • From: Bob Foster <bob@o...>
  • Patent Spam (was Re: US Patent 6,687,897)
    • From: David Megginson <dmeggin@a...>
  • Is the USPTO run by knaves or fools? - was Re: US Patent 6,687,897
    • From: Michael Champion <mc@x...>

• References:
  • US Patent 6,687,897
    • From: Michael Champion <mc@x...>

• Prev by Date: RE: database primary keys in XML Schema
• Next by Date: RE: US Patent 6,687,897
• Previous by thread: Re: US Patent 6,687,897
• Next by thread: Is the USPTO run by knaves or fools? - was Re: US Patent 6,687,897
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread