Peters, Edwin W. et al.

Patent Trials and Appeals Board

Sep 26, 2019

13839038 - (D) (P.T.A.B. Sep. 26, 2019)

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE United States Patent and Trademark Office Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS P.O. Box 1450 Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450 www.uspto.gov APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO. 13/839,038 03/15/2013 Edwin W. Peters CAM920130004US1_8150-0339 5879 52021 7590 09/30/2019 Cuenot, Forsythe & Kim, LLC 20283 State Road 7 Ste. 300 Boca Raton, FL 33498 EXAMINER GODBOLD, DOUGLAS ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER 2658 NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE 09/30/2019 ELECTRONIC Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding. The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication. Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the following e-mail address(es): ibmptomail@iplawpro.com PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07) UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE ____________ BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD ____________ Ex parte EDWIN W. PETERS, SHERRY L. PLATEK, NITTY T. PULIKAN, BALAJI RANGANATHAN, LIVIU RODEAN, BALASUBRAMANIAN SIVASUBRAMANIAN, and ERIC WOODS ____________ Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 Technology Center 2600 ____________ Before JOHN A. JEFFERY, ERIC S. FRAHM, and MELISSA A. HAAPALA, Administrative Patent Judges. JEFFERY, Administrative Patent Judge. DECISION ON APPEAL This application returns to us after we affirmed the Examiner’s decision to reject then-pending claims 8, 10-15, and 17-20. Ex parte Peters, Appeal No. 2016-004920 (PTAB Apr. 28, 2017) (“Bd. Dec.”), reh’g denied (PTAB Aug. 2, 2017) (“Reh’g Dec.”). Prosecution reopened after that decision, and Appellant1 now appeals under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner’s subsequent rejection of claims 21-40. We have jurisdiction under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b). We AFFIRM. 1 We use the word “Appellant” to refer to “applicant” as defined in 37 C.F.R. § 1.42. Appellant identifies the real party in interest as IBM Corporation. Appeal Br. 1. Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 2 STATEMENT OF THE CASE Appellant’s invention automatically takes notes in a virtual meeting including plural meeting content streams, at least one of which is in a non- text format. After converting the latter streams to text, the text is analyzed to identify a key element within the text to generate consolidated notes including that element. See generally Abstract. Claim 21 is illustrative: 21. A computer hardware system, comprising: a hardware processor configured to initiate the following executable operations: receiving a first meeting content stream from a first participant of a virtual meeting; receiving a second meeting content stream from a second participant of the virtual meeting; analyzing text of the first and second meeting content streams to identify key elements therein; cross-referencing the analysis of the text of first and second meeting content streams to identify a common key element in the analysis thereof that is common to both the first and second meeting content streams; and generating consolidated system notes that include the common key element, wherein the identifying of a key element includes establishing that each key element meets a predetermined threshold of significant [sic]. RELATED APPEALS As noted previously, we affirmed the Examiner’s decision to reject then-pending claims 8, 10-15, and 17-20 in an earlier appeal in the present application. The prior art at issue in this appeal, however, differs from that cited in the earlier appeal. This appeal is also related to appeals filed in (1) Application No. 14/216,682 (Appeal No. 2019-000163); (2) Application No. 13/838,731 Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 3 (Appeal No. 2019-002741); and (3) Application No. 14/523,250 (Appeal No. 2019-002736). See Appeal Br. 1-2, 29.2 THE REJECTIONS The Examiner provisionally rejected claims 21-40 on the ground of nonstatutory double patenting over claims 21-30 of copending Application No. 14/216,682. Final Act. 4-6. The Examiner rejected claims 21-25, 29-35, 39, and 40 under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) as anticipated by Bobbitt (US 2009/0276492 A1; published Nov. 5, 2009). Final Act. 6-10. The Examiner rejected claims 26-28 and 36-38 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as unpatentable over Bobbitt and Caspi (US 2004/0114746 A1; published June 17, 2004). Final Act. 11-12. THE PROVISIONAL DOUBLE PATENTING REJECTION Because Appellant does not contest the Examiner’s provisional double patenting rejection of claims 21-40 (see Appeal Br. 3 n.1), we summarily sustain this rejection. See Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (MPEP) § 1205.02 (9th ed. Rev. 08.2017, Jan. 2018); see also Reh’g Dec. 2-3 (explaining why we properly summarily sustained the Examiner’s provisional double patenting rejection in the earlier appeal). 2 Throughout this opinion, we refer to (1) the Final Rejection mailed February 27, 2018 (“Final Act.”); (2) the Appeal Brief filed July 19, 2018 (“Appeal Br.”); (3) the Examiner’s Answer mailed August 28, 2018 (“Ans.”); and (4) the Reply Brief filed October 8, 2018 (“Reply Br.”). Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 4 THE ANTICIPATION REJECTION The Examiner finds that Bobbitt discloses every recited element of independent claim 21 including a hardware processor configured to initiate the recited executable operations including (1) receiving first and second meeting content stream from first and second virtual meeting participants, respectively; and (2) cross-referencing the analysis of these streams’ text to identify a common key element in the analysis that is common to both streams. Final Act. 6-7. Appellant argues that Bobbitt does not receive two different content streams from the same virtual meeting, let alone cross-reference textual analysis of those streams to identify a common key element as claimed. Appeal Br. 9-15; Reply Br. 2-5. According to Appellant, Bobbitt’s “commonalities” are determined based on common participants-not cross- referencing textual analysis as claimed. Appeal Br. 12; Reply Br. 4-5. ISSUE Under § 102, has the Examiner erred in rejecting claim 21 by finding that Bobbitt discloses a hardware processor configured to initiate (1) receiving first and second meeting content stream from first and second virtual meeting participants, respectively; and (2) cross-referencing the analysis of these streams’ text to identify a common key element in the analysis that is common to both streams (the “cross-referencing limitation”)? ANALYSIS Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 5 As noted above, a key disputed issue is whether Bobbitt discloses a hardware processor configured to initiate receiving meeting content streams from respective participants of the same virtual meeting. The Specification, however, does not define the term “stream,” unlike other terms whose concrete definitions leave no doubt as to their meaning. See, e.g., Spec. ¶¶ 12, 21, 34-35, 47, 62, 64-67 (defining various terms explicitly). The Specification does, however, explain that meeting content can include, for example, (1) messaging (e.g., chat, instant messaging), (2) video, and/or (3) audio data, and that this content can be transmitted across one or more channels or streams and recorded. Spec. ¶ 28. The Specification’s paragraphs 39 to 43 give examples of these meeting content streams, including meeting slides as an example of a video stream, and chat as an example of a messaging stream. Notably, however, meeting content streams are not limited to messaging, video, and audio data: they can also include some other unspecified form of meeting content stream. See Spec. ¶ 36 (listing exemplary meeting content as a (1) video stream; (2) audio stream; (3) messaging stream; and/or (4) other meeting content stream). This description informs our understanding of the recited meeting content streams, and that it is not limited to a particular type of stream. We, therefore, construe the term “stream” with its plain meaning in the art that is synonymous with “channel,” namely “a path for data.” See Ian R. Sinclair, THE HARPERCOLLINS DICTIONARY OF COMPUTER TERMS 39 (1991) (noting that a “channel” is also called a “stream”), 229 (defining “stream” by referring to the definition of “channel”). Accord Spec. ¶ 28 (noting that meeting content can be transmitted across one or more channels or streams and recorded). Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 6 Given this construction, we see no error in the Examiner’s finding that Bobbitt discloses receiving meeting content streams from respective participants of the same virtual meeting. As noted in the Abstract, Bobbitt’s system automatically summarizes significant events that occur within a collaborative discussion in an immersive collaborative environment. To this end, the system summarizes a captured record, namely a sequential data set that can include, among other things, audio, video, and user comments so that by documenting the associated collaborative discussion within a virtual workspace environment, a user can obtain the gist or substance of a meeting that occurred within that environment. See Bobbitt ¶¶ 32-35. Specifically, activities or events within a virtual workspace or immersive collaborative environment are monitored in real- or near real-time, including, among other things, content, actions, data accesses, individuals present, and conversations, and significant events are inferred from this monitoring. Bobbitt ¶¶ 45-46. Because users participate in this virtual workspace or immersive collaborative environment via their workstations as shown in Bobbitt’s Figure 1, data that is monitored within this environment, including the associated audio, video, and discussion, would have been received via meeting content streams, namely data paths, from respective participants. Although only one participant is shown using a workstation in Bobbitt’s Figure 1, there are nevertheless other participants in that virtual workspace as shown by their avatars in the virtual conference room depicted in that workspace. See Bobbitt ¶ 38 (noting that users are represented in the virtual business or enterprise environment as avatars that occupy the spaces or rooms), ¶ 39 (noting that groups of users can be depicted as performing Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 7 business tasks while in the virtual world, including attending meetings or collaborating with others). Although the users’ avatars are shown seated (or standing) around a table in the virtual workspace in Bobbitt’s Figure 1, the actual users are nevertheless participating in that virtual meeting via their respective workstations, transferring data to and from the system hosting that virtual workspace via their respective data paths or streams. Accord Ans. 9 (noting that each user in Bobbitt’s Figure 1 has a workstation, and content is necessarily received from each user’s workstation to establish and conduct a meeting). That the block diagrams of Bobbitt’s immersive collaborative system and associated computing environment in Figures 4 and 10 show devices for multiple clients as the Examiner indicates (Ans. 9) only bolsters the Examiner’s findings in this regard. See Bobbitt ¶¶ 56-57, 99-101 (describing the functionality of Figures 4 and 10). Nor are we persuaded of error in the Examiner’s finding that Bobbitt’s criteria identification component functionality in Figure 8 anticipates the recited cross-referencing limitation. See Final Act. 7 (citing Bobbitt ¶¶ 79-81); Ans. 9-11. As we noted in our earlier decision, the term “cross- referencing” is not defined in the Specification, unlike other terms whose concrete definitions leave no doubt as to their meaning. See Bd. Dec. 5-6. We further noted that, according to the Specification’s paragraph 37, analysis engine 125 can index and/or cross-reference meeting content to extract key elements therefrom, and that this extraction can use significance scoring based on (1) time spent on the point; (2) the point’s appearance in multiple meeting content streams; (3) note commonalities, etc. Id. We emphasized, however, that although this broad and exemplary description Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 8 informed our understanding of cross-referencing in the context of the claimed invention in the earlier appeal, it was not so limited. Id. 6. That is the case here. Therefore, as in our earlier decision, we construe the term “cross-reference” under its plain meaning, namely “reference from one part of a book, etc., to another.” Id. 6 (citing dictionary definition). With this construction, we see no error in the Examiner’s finding that Bobbitt anticipates the recited cross-referencing limitation. Bobbitt’s paragraphs 79 to 81, on which the Examiner relies (see Final Act. 7; Ans. 9-11), refer to an alternative system in Figure 8 that uses a criteria identification component 108 that includes (1) content determination component 802; (2) contacts determination component 804; and (3) context determination component 806. As explained in Bobbitt’s paragraph 79, the content determination component can establish the subject of discussion within a virtual environment by using, among other things, speech recognition, text analyzers, or pattern recognition to gather information about the virtual workspace-information that is then analyzed to establish the workspace’s content. Similarly, the contacts determination component can employ voice or pattern recognition to identify presence of contacts within the environment, where this presence information can be used to further analyze the factors surrounding the discussion within the virtual environment. Bobbitt ¶ 80. For example, commonalities can be drawn between contacts to increase probabilities of determining a topic of discussion from the record. Id. If, for example, there are three participants in an immersive collaborative discussion, it can be determined that these three individuals are members of the team for Project XYZ, and, therefore, it can be determined that there is a Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 9 high probability that the discussion is centered around Project XYZ. Id. Notably, this determination can be supplemented with other information, such as content determined by the content determination component. Id. The clear import of this functionality is that, by using text analysis and pattern recognition to gather and analyze information to (1) establish the virtual workspace’s content and contacts; (2) draw commonalities between these contacts; and (3) determine the topic of discussion involving these contacts, Bobbitt’s system effectively cross-references the textual analysis of the participants’ meeting content streams or data paths to identify a common key element, namely the topic. We emphasize Bobbitt’s pattern recognition here, for this technique includes textual pattern recognition. See MICROSOFT COMPUTER DICTIONARY 394 (5th ed. 2002) (defining “pattern recognition,” in pertinent part, as “[t]he recognition of purely mathematical or textual patterns”) (emphasis added). Appellant’s contention, then, that Bobbitt is ostensibly silent as to how Bobbitt determines that the three participants are members of the same team for Project XYZ in paragraph 80 (Reply Br. 4) is unpersuasive. This contention ignores the fact that textual pattern recognition is used to identify participants from which commonalities are drawn-participants who transfer data to and from the system hosting the virtual workspace via their respective data paths or streams as noted previously. That Bobbitt’s topic determination based on this pattern recognition can be supplemented with other information similarly obtained via textual analysis and pattern recognition, such as content determined by the content determination component (as noted in paragraph 80), only further bolsters the notion that Bobbitt effectively cross-references the textual analysis of the participants’ meeting content streams or data paths to Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 10 identify a common key element, namely the topic of the participants’ discussion. Lastly, we note that although the Examiner relies on the embodiments of Bobbitt’s Figures 1 and 8 in finding that Bobbitt anticipates claim 21 (see Final Act. 6-7; Ans. 9-11), this multi-embodiment approach is not only undisputed on this record, it is not dispositive of error in the Examiner’s anticipation rejection in any event. It is well settled that a prior art reference can anticipate a claim even if the reference does not expressly spell out all limitations arranged or combined as claimed if ordinarily skilled artisans, reading the reference, would “at once envisage” the claimed arrangement or combination. Blue Calypso, LLC v. Groupon, Inc., 815 F.3d 1331, 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2016) (quoting Kennametal, Inc. v. Ingersoll Cutting Tool Co., 780 F.3d 1376, 1383 (Fed. Cir. 2015)). That is, a reference need not always expressly discuss the actual combination to anticipate. Blue Calypso, 815 F.3d at 1344. Rather, a reference can still anticipate if it teaches that the disclosed components or functionalities may be combined, and ordinarily skilled artisans would be able to implement the combination. Id. That is the case here, at least with respect to common virtual workspace and participant functionalities shown in Bobbitt’s Figures 1 and 8. We reach this conclusion noting the figures’ striking similarity in this regard, including their identical depictions of the virtual workspace and its participants, the immersive collaborative display, and participant using a workstation. Therefore, we are not persuaded that the Examiner erred in rejecting claim 21, and claims 22-25, 29-35, 39, and 40 not argued separately with particularity. Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 11 THE OBVIOUSNESS REJECTION Claims 26 and 36 We are also unpersuaded of error in the Examiner’s obviousness rejection of claim 26, which recites: the common key element, within the consolidated system notes, includes a link to at least a portion of the first and second meeting content streams that are stored within a database, and the portion, to the link is directed, includes a relevant portion of the first and second meeting content streams from which the common key element was extracted. Although the Examiner acknowledges on page 11 of the Final Rejection that Bobbitt does not teach these elements specifically, and cites Caspi to cure this deficiency, the Examiner nonetheless clarifies on pages 12 and 13 of the Answer that Bobbitt-not Caspi-was cited to teach the recited (1) common key element; (2) consolidated system notes; and (3) first and second meeting streams. As part of this clarification, the Examiner emphasizes that Caspi was cited merely for teaching linking original content streams at relevant points in a summary, and that the claim would have been obvious over Bobbitt’s and Caspi’s collective teachings. See Ans. 12-13; Final Act. 11 (explaining that it would have been obvious to combine Caspi’s linking functionality with Bobbitt’s system to allow the user to more easily review relevant portions of a conference). Despite Appellant’s arguments to the contrary (Appeal Br. 15-19; Reply Br. 5-8), we see no harmful error in the Examiner’s obviousness rejection as clarified in the Answer. First, a key aspect of this dispute centers on the meaning of the term “link” in the context of claim 26, namely that the common key element, within the consolidated system notes, Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 12 includes a link to a portion of the stored meeting content streams. The Specification, however, does not define the term “link,” unlike other terms whose concrete definitions leave no doubt as to their meaning. See, e.g., Spec. ¶¶ 12, 21, 34-35, 47, 62, 64-67 (defining various terms explicitly). Although the Specification’s paragraph 21 defines the term “communicatively linked” clearly and unambiguously, there is no such concrete definition for the term “link” as the term is used in claim 26-an omission underscored by Appellant’s reliance on a general-purpose dictionary in defining the term. See Reply Br. 7. Nevertheless, the Specification discusses various linking functionalities in paragraphs 31, 44, 46, and 54. Paragraph 31, for example, explains that virtual meeting module 120 can be configured to link meeting content 140 to the data extracted therefrom (e.g., the text of the audio, video and/or messaging channels). Notably, this paragraph indicates, quite broadly, that this linking can be performed in any suitable manner including, for example, tagging the meeting content with a timestamp to indicate when each meeting content portion was made. Spec. ¶ 31. The Specification adds, quite broadly, that data or notes extracted or generated from the meeting content can be linked or otherwise associated with virtual meeting content having the same timestamp to allow quick recall of meeting content during that timestamp. Id. The Specification’s paragraph 44 similarly discusses linking in broad and exemplary terms. That paragraph explains that consolidated system notes 145 can include links back to the associated the meeting content. For example, the consolidated system notes can present key elements that provide links back to the underlying recording of one or more content Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 13 streams of the meeting content from which the notes were extracted. Spec. ¶ 44. The Specification adds that this linking of the consolidated system notes to the original meeting content can include linking the notes to surrounding meeting content to provide context. Id. The Specification’s paragraph 46 similarly discusses linking in broad and exemplary terms. That paragraph explains that each key element may link to individual content streams relating to that element, and that the virtual meeting module can link the key elements to meeting content recordings that occurred at or near the same time. For example, the virtual meeting module can tag the meeting content with a timestamp indicating when each portion of the meeting content was made. Spec. ¶ 46. The Specification further explains, quite broadly, that the virtual meeting module can link the notes or key elements extracted from the meeting content with the actual meeting content, allowing quick recall of audio, video, chat and/or other data streams during that time. Id. Although these descriptions inform our understanding of the recited link in the context of the disclosed invention, the term is not so limited. We, therefore, construe the term “link” with its plain meaning in the art. The term “link” is defined, in pertinent part, as synonymous with a pointer, namely “[a] character or group of characters that indicates the location of an item of data in memory.” John Daintith & Edmund Wright, THE FACTS ON FILE DICTIONARY OF COMPUTER SCIENCE 122 (Revised ed. 2006) (small capital letters omitted) (“Facts on File Dictionary”). Accord id. at 173 (defining the term “pointer” similarly). Given this interpretation, we see no error in the Examiner’s reliance on Caspi’s summarization functionality for at least suggesting the recited Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 14 link (Ans. 12-13), particularly in view of Caspi’s indices in Figure 9B that mark “points” or recording cues by a time stamp on a recorded conference 900b. See Caspi ¶¶ 70-71. These index-based pointers reasonably comport with the definition of “link” above, namely “[a] character or group of characters that indicates the location of an item of data in memory.” Facts on File Dictionary 173. We reach this conclusion even if claim 26 required an activatable link-which it does not. Although dependent claim 27 requires activating the link, there is no such activation in claim 26 from which claim 27 depends, nor will we import such a requirement into claim 26 despite Appellant’s arguments to the contrary. See Appeal Br. 19 (arguing that claim 26’s link is “activatable code”). Nevertheless, Appellant’s arguments regarding Caspi’s individual shortcomings regarding the recited link (App. Br. 15-19; Reply Br. 5-8), do not show nonobviousness where, as here, the rejection is not based on Caspi alone, but rather based on the cited references’ collective teachings. See In re Merck & Co., 800 F.2d 1091, 1097 (Fed. Cir. 1986). Accord Ans. 12-13 (noting this point). Although the claimed invention is not “a recipe to make soup” as Appellant contends (Reply Br. 6), familiar items may nevertheless have obvious uses beyond their primary purposes, and often ordinarily skilled artisans can fit multiple references’ teachings together like puzzle pieces, as is the case here. See KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc., 550 U.S. 398, 420 (2007). On this record, then, the Examiner’s proposed enhancement uses prior art elements predictably according to their established functions-an obvious improvement. See id. at 417. Moreover, the Examiner provides persuasive rationale to support the combination, namely that the Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 15 combination would allow the user to more easily review relevant portions of the conference. See Final Act. 11. Therefore, we are not persuaded that the Examiner erred in rejecting claim 26, and claim 36 not argued separately with particularity. Claims 27, 28, 37, and 38 We also sustain the Examiner’s rejection of claim 27, which recites “activation of the link, within the consolidated system notes, causes the relevant portion of the first and second meeting content streams from which the common key element was extracted to be presented.” Despite Appellant’s arguments to the contrary (Appeal Br. 20; Reply Br. 8-10), we see no error in the Examiner’s reliance on Caspi’s summarization functionality for at least suggesting the recited link activation and resulting content presentation (Final Act. 12; Ans. 14), particularly in view of Caspi’s indices in Figure 9B that mark “points” or recording cues by a time stamp on a recorded conference 900b for playback. See Caspi ¶¶ 55, 70-71. After a participant, such as a moderator, activates or invokes a “recording cue,” such as the cues at times Ta and Tb in Caspi’s Figure 4, Caspi’s system either marks predetermined periods (e.g., 410 and 412) on the recorded conference or saves these periods as a separate summary file. See Caspi ¶¶ 55. That is, for later playback, the system either marks the point where the cue was recorded on the conference’s master recording, or stores the associated passage in a separate file. Caspi ¶ 62. In either case, the conference portion pertinent to the cue is designated for later playback. Id. Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 16 As shown in Caspi’s Figures 7A and 7B, summarizations are played by activating a summary function via the user interface in Figure 7B by (1) selecting the conference from window 7002, and (2) selecting the play button. Caspi ¶¶ 64-66. Our emphasis underscores that by activating this summary playback functionality, the associated links to the respective content portions, such as those shown in Caspi’s Figure 9B, are effectively activated to retrieve and play back the particular content portions associated with those links. Accord Ans. 11. We reach this conclusion emphasizing that claim 27 does not specify how the link is activated-an activation that is at least suggested by Caspi’s link-based playback functionality. Appellant’s arguments, including Caspi’s summaries and complete record in paragraph 71 being within the same file (Appeal Br. 20; Reply Br. 8-10) are not only in commensurate with the scope of the claim, but also do not show nonobviousness where, as here, the rejection is not based on Caspi alone, but rather based on the cited references’ collective teachings. See Merck, 800 F.2d at 1097. Therefore, we are not persuaded that the Examiner erred in rejecting claim 27, and claims 28, 37, and 38 not argued separately with particularity. Appeal 2019-000215 Application 13/839,038 17 CONCLUSION In summary: Claims Rejected Basis Affirmed Reversed 21-40 (provisional) obviousness-type double patenting 21-40 21-25, 29-35, 39, 40 § 102 Bobbitt 21-25, 29-35, 39, 40 26-28, 36-38 § 103 Bobbitt, Caspi 26-28, 36-38 Overall Outcome 21-40 AFFIRMED Notice of References Cited 13/839,038 2019-000215 The fact~ On File Dictionary of Computer Science Revised Edition Cop,Tight O 2001, 2006 by \farket House Rooks Ltd :\li right, reserved. :\o part of this book may he n:pron:: ::::.·c· :-hu~e:.; in a v.l.riery of .iis(·;--:~~::~. ~cc:e. physics. rnath::n-:.,::..:,. · · ,- · ,~1scn..:e. The iirst edition of rhi, r,1 :::,;cnsively revised a;1J c'.: ,:-. > : :~,· n:nninology of ,:om~'l'.: :-.{ ,, ,wer 500 pnmun..:1,n:c,r:,: : ·. · :-c:ndixes haw been in..:luj·.:. :cnsions. domain n;.1me,. F ,; : .. ,nd ,1 hiblio~raphy. A ,;rn(:, ,:,t l'ersion of the hook. \:(\· would like to thank ,1!1 ::~c : ..\ iist of contributors 1, s:,. :-~. · :ho· many peopk who h.i-.. ,. ~ · , · link i paper hammers !not all shown) ribbon rows of embossed characters rotating cylinder barrel printer i ,(o paper ribbon lq0fl2 ~/( (ffiffir embossed characters hammers {not all shownl rotating metal belt band printer Line printers link 1. (linkage) The part of a rnmputer program, possibly a single instruction or address, that passes control and PARA~lF- l U(s bctwei:n separate portions of the pro- gram. 2. {pointer\ A charackr or group of char- aners that indicates 1he LOCATIO!\ of an item of data in memory. .3. A path for communications. See data link. 4. See hypertext. 5. To join together program modules that have been compiled separately ro form a program that can he t"xecutnl. This opera- tion is performed by a I INK EDITOR. linkage See link. link editor (linkage editor: linker! A L'TH.fl Y PRO\;RA'>I rhar combim::5 a number ot user-written or library routines, which h;iye already been compiled or assembled bur ;\re individualh- incomplete, into a sin· glc c·wcutable program. This program is then ~irher srored on disk or pLKed in main store for immediate execution. A link edi- tor that performs the larter function is sometimes called a li11k /o,1der. See also program library. linked list See list. 122 :ikcr See link ediror. .:ik loader Sec link ediror. .::ikrot /link-roll fn/rmna/ F:c - ,, in wh1d1 m l'ERTFXT lead, - -:-1mc \l'eh site, han· remmcd . . ~d their \Vch pages ,ind thL .:Jared . .. mux /Jin-uh/ A freelv di,tnb::· · : .: :ing system that run; on sc·,, - : · :·e platforms mcluding In:. ' ·r,,rola microproc::.,,sors, ,inJ ,,· .. - , ,ind ~facinroshe1. Linm. is .: • - · 1·,: \ninen bv Linus Torvald,. l:, .. ·· Jc-;_1s1:d rnpi:lly in recent vcah. c,:·. _ · ,FR\TK5 . . guid crystal display Sec Lcr, . ,,p A high-Ind programrnim: .;: _ fiuse norne i, dniwd from lisr p· . ·. ,\-.]S developed in the carh· ! '1· .,, designed ,pecificall1· for the c· n "t Lb! and I RH strm:cure, , ·1ds and has ,m unu~ual ,.-,;; rtr taken 11p by rhose \\·nrkrr.~ .--,crgenr field of .\IZTJrIC!\l 1:-;,·, 1cre arc now a number of dia 1c,c,, ·,. rrnded in various direction,. I ·.: - · .. •.,rn, are gt,nerall\' transLited h, =n:R. 'ist One form in which ,, coL~- _1ra items can be held in cornrc::;- :;. The irL·ms thcmsdves art' m .: .. ' ordE'r. Th~ items c:ould all be · •r exa111ple, or real numbers, o, le::,-. ·'1cy nrnld he a mixi:ur·e of, s,n. ·,,l real JHm1bcrs. If all rhe item~ ., - . -.1me type rhen the· list is a one-di,:·.,··. ~RAY. There are two commonlv m~J : d1ich this collection of da;a item, -, mt'mory. In a sequenti,dfr ,1/!, ,,· .• : ·'le items arc stored in their ~urrt-:: · - .· · ,,ljaccnt I.OCATic)'is. In a linked h,; ,.:_ · ..Ition contains ,1 data item .1nd ,i 1 :.1i11i11g the address of the nn:r ncr:· .l:'r; the last item has a spcci,il linl.: :: . ::1g that there are no more items 1r, : · - \',iriou, operations can he pert- ,r-•·,. music tracks but fn, been extended to ,)ther type, of audio content. An item made .w:iilable in this way is called a /wdt,¥$1, the .1..:t of doing so is to f,odc,1st. and a person ,,r organization that does ~o is ,1 podcaster. \ !any radio broa,kasttT, ,trc making their programs available a, podca5ts and are ex- pecting podcasting to become an impor- tant distribution method. However, pod- casting is not confined ro cst::iblished media rnmp,mies: anybody with appropriate lurdware and software - both of which are cheap and widely a1°aibble - can ere.He an \:IP3 file, post it on tl1e \'\'eb, and adverrise ir, content through a \H.B n.ED. ·1 he term ·podcasring' was iirst used in 2005 and is a blend of 'iPod' and 'broadcasting' - a trib- ute to rhe u·oo', iconic status as the an:hc- ryp,11 MP3 player, although neither an iPnd nor :my other :-.!1'3 player is es,emi,,1 tn li,- ren ro podcasts. It is expecttd that podcasts will soon encompass video ,1s \\·ell as audio content. point 1. In typogrnphy, a unit equ,11 ro iust under 1/72 of an inch that is u,e, a l\!Ol·\E, JOY,TILK, TRACKLR- BA! L, rnl:CH-SF:\,lT!VF DE\'!CE, or tl!Gflf7.- Jc-((; P \D. point of presence 1,POPi A point 111 a polling \X'A'.\I to which a user can connect with, for example, a local telephone call. For exam- ple, an ISP has a point of presence on the lntt'rnet. point of sale (POS) The pla..:e where goods are paid for in a store, etc., oltcn with a Ptl!NT-OF-SAI E UR,\.IINAL linked [O a computerized tn1nsaction system. point-of-sale terminal (POS terminal) A specialized cash register, credit-card recording system, or ticket dispenser that records the cletails relating ro the: sale of goods, generallv using a scanner to read bar codes or tags, and feeds the informa- tion into a central computer. This system improve, ,tock, cash, and credit control. point-to-point protocol (PPP1 A pru· rocol u,cd hy machines that support snial interfaces, such as modems and ADSl transceiver.,. PPP is commonly used m pro- vide and access dial-up services to lnrernet service providers. !'PP can share a line with other user~, and unlike ,UP it can handle asyni.;hronous as well ;is synchronous ,:om- munication and ha, error detecrion in- cluded. policy In policy-base allocated .1mong its users. Parameters for allornrion, which can be ,tatic or dvnamic, include items ,uch a, time oi Lfay,.dienr priority, anJ resource ,w,1ilability. Policies ;1re neared by net, work man:iger, ,rnd used by network-man- agement software to mah: decisions. Policies can also be u,ed to control how much freedom networked users are permit- ted in other areas, for example ro what ex- tt'TH they may customize rheir L>ESKTCW. polling A technique wherebv a com- purer checks e,Kh of a nmnber of input de- vices in rotation to see it any dara is waiting to be read. Polling depends for its sucu:ss on eaL"h device being checked at least as frequently as the data is arriYing; in addition the time spent pnxessing ,my data chat has arrived rnusr nor be too long so that data on other devi<.:es is missed. Polling 173 '~1CT10NARY COMPUTER TERMS In-Depth Explanations and Examples Covering Over Ian R. Sinclair 2,000 Entries with Extensive Diagrams and Charts The HarperCollins Dictionary of Computer Terms Copyright © Ian R. Sinclair 1991 All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any manner whatsoever without written permission except in the case of brief quotations embodied in critical articles and reviews. For information address HarpcrCollins Pnblishers, 10 East 53rd Street, New York, N.Y. 10022. Library of Coogress Cataloging-in-Public11tion Data Sinclair, Ian Robinson. [Collins dictionary of computing} Harper dictionary of computing I Ian R. Sinclair. - ht U.S. ed., 1st HarperPerennial ed. p. cm. "Originally published 1986 in Great Britain by William Collins Sons & Co. under the title: Gem dictionary of computing; previotL~ly published with revisions 1988 in Great Britain by William Collins Sons &: Co. nnder the title: Collins dictionary of compnting"-T.p. verso. ISBN 0-06--461016-0 (pbk) 1. Compnters-Dictionaries. 2. Electronic data processing- Dictionaries. I. Title. QA76.15.S494 1991 004'.03-dc20 90-55516 91 92 93 94 95 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 ACKNOWLEDG \IE'\ Julian Reitman provided valuable assistance- · :- :: ~: his first exposure to computers during the I ,. " , :: puters to improve human performanee of :-:-. ...:-: turned his attention to digital computers for d , " then he has designed, developed, programmc°d "' about digital computers of many sizes. He is rhe . Simulation Applications as well as numerc..:, :, :~ University of Connecticut, he teaches cours,> ::_ ::. ogy and the history of information processin E CHARACTER BLOCK numbering jts row and its column. 2. a unit of memory, storing one byte, and with a unique ADDRESS number. centering the placing of a wnrd or phrase in the middle of a printed line during word processing. Centronics interface a universally accepted INTERFACE for print- ers. This is the type of jnterface referred to as parallel, meaning one line is used for each bit of a byte, along with lines for synchronizing signals. The standard was devised by the printer manufacturer Cen- tronics Inc., and it is normal to find that any computer using the Centronics interface will match with any printer using this interface. CHAIN l. in some computing languages, a command that forces a program to halt and then load and run another program and make use of the results. The extra program uses variable values from the main program, does not replace the original, and is deleted after it has run. 2. on some small machines, a command that loads and runs a program, deleting any other program previously present. chain search a SEQUENTIAL search through items until the required item or the end of the list is reached. This involves items such as RECORDS that can contain POINTERS to other items. A typical exam- ple of chain searching is found in information services of the TELE- TEXT type, so if you look up travel, you find references to road, rail, sea, and air. Looking up air then produces a list of airports, and so on. Chain searching is acceptable if the computer carries out the search automatically, but can be very slow if each item has to be selected manually. channel a path for data. Also called stream. Several operating systems use fixed channels that are identified by number so, for example, PRINT#O means print on screen, PRINT#8 means print on paper, and PRINT#9 means store on tape or di.~k. This use of channels makes it possible to have commands, such as PRINT# X, in which the VARIABLE X can be assigned (sec ASSIGNATION) numbers that will cause lhe data to be directed in different ways. character any letter, digit, punctuation mark, or graphics symbol represented by one ASCII code number. This excludes codes for actions, such as line feed or carriage return, which are represented by code numbers in the range O to 31. character block the set of dots that can be used to make up a charac- ter. A screen dfaplay of the usual VDU type uses a dot of light that scans across and down the screen. The shape of a character is ob- 39 STRING page number, current line number, word count, etc. Several word processors allow a choice of status lines, according to the type of information required. status poll signals sent out by a central processing system to find the status of PERIPHERALS, such as the printer, keyboard, and screen. A status poll, for example, might reveal that the printer is olf or out of paper, the screen needs scrolling, or a key is being pressed on the keyboard. See also POLLING, INTERilUPTS. status word a set of bytes that signals more than one status. stepping motor a motor that can move in precise and equal steps over a range. Each step is produced by a pulse of current to the motor; and the importance of the stepping motor lies in the fact that the pulses of current can be delivered from a suitable INTERFACE, under computer control. The stepping motor is used, for example, in disk drives to control the position of the disk READ/WRITE head, and in printers to control the movement of a DAISY WHEEL. It also has considerable applications in PLOTfERS and for ROBOTICS. stop bit the bit that follows the last bit of a byte in SERIAL data transmission and is used as a signal to the receiver that the entire byte has been transmitted. Many PROTOCOLS employ two stop bits. On reception of a stop bit, the microprocessor of the receiver will place the assembled byte into memory, and then set up for another START BIT. stop code an EMBEDDED COMMAND code used to stop the printer. This might be used, for example, to remove a sheet of headed paper and insert plain paper. Most word-processor programs can be pro- grammed so the stop action is automatic at the end of a page, thus enabling single sheets to be used with the printer. stop list a list of words that are not to be used. An automatic indexing program, for example, must be provided with a list of words such as "and" and "but" that will not be indexed. store a memory location or REGISTER. stream see CHANNEL. string a DATA TYPE consisting of a set of characters. Most versions of BASIC allow a string to be represented by a variable name followed by the DOLLAB SIGN, with up to 255 characters in the string. Many other languages do not possess a string variable as such. Instead, they use an ARRAY of ASCII codes, which requires DIMENSIONING. Others treat a string as a LIST of characters. See Fig. 68. 229 PUBLISHED BY t\·1icrosoft Press ;\ Division of Microsoft Corporation One Microsoft Way Redmond. Washington 98052-6399 Copyrighl © 2002 hy Microson Corporation All rights reserved. No part of the contellls or this hook may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission or the puhlishcr. Lihrary of Congress Control Number: 2002019714 Microsoft Press books are available through booksellers and distributors worldwide. For further informa- tion aboul intcrnalional editions. contact your local Microsoft Corporation office or contact lvlicrosoft Press International directly at fax (425) 936-7329. Visit our Web site at www.microsofl.com/mspress. Send comments lo 111spi11p111@111icrosofi.co111. Active Desktop. Active Directory. ActiveMovie, ActiveStore, ActivcSync. Activ.:X. Authenticode. BackOITice, BizTalk. ClearType. Direct3D. DirectAnimation. DirectDraw, Dircctlnpul. DirectMusic. DirectPlay, DirectShow. DirectSound. DirectX, Entourage. FoxPro. rrontPage, Hotmail. IntelliEye, IntelliMouse, lntelliScnse. JScripl. MapPoint. Microsoft. Microsoft Press, Mohilc Explorer. MS-DOS, MSN, Music Central. NctMccting, Outlook. PhotoDraw. PowcrPoint. SharePoinl, Ultimah.:TV. Yisio. Visual Basic. Visual C++. Visual FoxPro. Visual lnterDev. Visual J++. Visual SourceSafe. Visual Studio. \Vin32. Win32s, Windows, Windows Media. Windows NT, Xbox are either registered trademarks or trademarks of J\'licrosoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. Other product and company names mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners. The example companies, organizations, products, domain names. e-mail addresses. logos. people. places, and events depicted herein arc fictitious. No association with any t\'al company. organi7alion. product. domain name. e-mail address. logo. person. place. or event is intended or should be inferred. Acquisitions Editor: Alex Hlantnn Project Editor: Sandra Haynes Body Part No. XOS-41929 path circumstances. Patching is a common mcans of adding a feature or a function to a program until thc next version of the software is released. Compare hack (dcl1nition 2). kludge (definition 2). path 11. 1. In communications. a link between 1wo nodes in a network. 2. A route thrnugh a structured colkction of information. as in a database, a progrnm. or tiles stored on disk. 3. In programming. 1hc sequence of instructions a computer .:arrics out in executing a routine. 4. In informa- tion processing. such as the theory underlying expc11 (deductive) systems. a logical course through the hranches of a tree of inferences leading to a conclusion. 5. In file storage. the route followed by the operating system thmugh the directoric~ in finding. stH1ing. and retrieving fih:s on a disk. 6. In graphics, an accumulation of line seg- ments or curves tn he lillcd or drawn. path menu 11. In wind0wed .:nvironments. the menu or drop hox used to enter the universal naming convention palh to a shared network resource. pathname 11. In a hierarchical tiling system. a listing of the directories or folders that lc,id rrom the current direc- tory lo a file. Also railed: directory path. pattern recognition 11. l. A broad technology describing the ahility of a computer to identify patterns. Till' !<:rm usually refers lo computer recognition of visual images or sound patterns that have been converted to arrays of num- bers. 2. The recognition of purely mathematical or textual paltems. Pause key 11. l. A key on a keyboard that temporarily stops the operation of a program or a command. Thc Pause key is used. for example. to hall scrolling so that a multi- screen listing or document can be read. 2. Any key t!1at creates a pause in an operation. For example. many game programs have a Pause key. often simply the P key. that temporarily suspend, the g,ime. payload 11. The effects caused by a virus or other mali- cious t:odc. The payload of a ,·irus may include moving. altering. overwriting. and deleting files. or other destruc- tive activity. A virus or worm may t:,1ntain more than one payload. each with a separate trigger. PB 11. See petabyte. PB SRAM 11. Ser pip\!line burst static RAl'vl. 394 PBX 11. Acronym for Private Hranch Exchange - - matic telephone switching system that enahk, _, · within an organization to place calls 10 each ot~ _ going through the public telephone network. L ,_ also place calls to outside numbers. PC 11. I. A microcomputer that conforms to th~ ---~ developed hy IBM for personal computers. wh':- microprocessor in the Intel 80x86 family (or c, - and can execute the BIOS. See the illustration._. 8086. BIOS. clone, IBl'vl PC. 2. A computer in [i: sonal Computer line. Also called: IBM PC. Sn compatihlc (definition I). personal computer. PC. PCB 11. See printed circuit hoard. PC board 11. See printed circuit board. PC Card 11. An add-in card that conforms to thi: i:,- spccilication. A PC Card is a removable device. c-- · rnately the same size as a credit card. that is de,if-. plug into a PCivlCIA slot. Release I of the PC1'1C iltcation. introduc'"d in June 1990. specified a T:-:, that is 3.3 millimeters thick and is intended to h~ _ marily as a memory-related peripheral. Releas.: : PCMCIA spccitication. introduced in September specifies both a 5-millimeter-thick Type [[ card :; 0 ~ • I O.S-millimeter-thick Type Ill card. Type fl card, __ • modati: devices such as modem. fax. and network . __ Type Ill cards accommodate devices that require - space. such as wireless communications device, l-. ing sll>ragc media (such as hard disks). See also PC' PCMCIA slot. P.