{) '7- o i r•~ll~frn: ,,;~:~:e,-~:; :a~;~~~
`
`Express Mail No. EV0948 22 l 6US
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`PROVISIONAL APPLICATION COVER SHEET
`This is a request for filing a PROVISIONAL APPLICATION under 37 CFR §l.53(c)(l).
`
`LAST NAME
`
`Reisman
`
`FIRST NAME
`
`Richard
`
`INVENTOR(s)/ APPLICANT(s)
`MIDDLE INITIAL
`RESJDEI\CE(CTTY ANDE!TI-IBlSTAlEORRJREIGNCDUNIRY)
`
`20 East 9th Street, Apt. 14K, New York, NY 10003
`
`TITLE
`Method and Apparatus For Browsmg Usmg Multiple Coordmated Device Sets
`CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS
`Customer Number or Bar Code Label, or
`Correspondence address below
`
`I \11\1\\111\ \\\I\ 11\1\ Ill\\ 11111\11
`27123
`
`p A TENT TRADEMARK OFFlCE
`
`)
`1'AFFIX CUSTOMER NO. BAR CODE LABEL ABOVE 1'
`
`\'-..__
`
`Name
`Address
`
`Z1p Code
`State
`Fax
`Telephone
`ENCLOSED APPLICATION PARTS (check all that apply)
`IZJ Small Entity Status is/has been claimed.
`~ Spccificat10n Number of Pages [187] and 1 page of abstract
`D Assignment ____ _
`~ Drawings(s) Number of Sheets [.!i]
`D Other. ____ _
`~ [824]Claims(s)
`Number of Sheets [130] (not reqwred)
`METHOD OF PAYMENT (check 01te}
`A check or money order is enclosed to cover the Provisional
`filing fees.
`The Commissioner 1s hereby authonzed to charge the filing fees
`and credit Deposit Account No. 13-4500,
`Order No.
`
`PROVISIONAL
`FILING FEE
`AMOUNT($)
`
`C8J
`(cid:143)
`
`$80.00 (small entity)
`
`$160.00
`
`City
`Country
`
`(cid:143)
`
`The Commissioner 1s hereby authonzcd to charge any additional
`fee(s) which may be requtred, or to credit any overpayment, to
`Deposit Account No. 13-4500 Order No. 4138-4003US I.
`
`The invention was made by an agency of the United States Government or under a contract with an agency of the United
`States Government.
`[gj No D Yes, the name of the U.S. Government agency and the Government contract number are: ____ _
`D
`e_d on separately numbered sheets attached hereto
`
`Respectfu~y7sub
`
`itte ,
`
`Signature __ . , , . _~ - - - - - - - - - -~ - - - - - - - - -
`, L
`
`Date: September 6, 2002
`
`Type or Print Name
`
`Registration No.
`
`726015 vi
`
`PROVISIONAL APPL/CATION FILING ONLY
`
`

`

`PATENT
`Docket No.4138-4003USI
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Applicant( s)
`
`Richard R. Reisman
`
`Senal No.
`
`TBA
`
`Group Art Unit: TBA
`Examiner: TBA
`
`Filed
`
`For
`
`,. ·,
`
`September 6, 2002
`
`Method and Apparatus For Browsing Using Multiple Coordinated Device
`Sets
`
`EXPRESS MAIL CERTIFICATE
`
`Express Mail Label No. EV094892216US
`
`Date of Deposit September 6, 2002
`
`I hereby certify that the following attached paper(s) and/or fee Provisional Patent Application Cover Sheet
`
`( enclosmg I 87 pages specification; 1 page of abstract; 130 pages of claims; 8 sheets of formal drawings (Figs 1-8));
`
`a check m the amount of$80.00 and Return Postcard 1s bemg deposited with the United States Postal Service
`
`"Express Mail Post Office to Addressee" service under 37 C.F.R. § 1.10 on the date indicated above and is addressed
`
`to the Commissioner for Patents, Washington, D.C. 20231.
`
`Vivian King
`
`paper(s) and/or fee)
`
`CORRESPONDENCE ADDRESS:
`MORGAN & FINNEGAN, L.L.P.
`345 Park Avenue
`New York, New York 10154
`(212) 758-4800
`(212) 751-6849 Facsimile
`
`FORM: EXP-MAIL.NY
`Rev. 05/27/98
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US 1
`
`U.S. PROVISIONAL PATENT APPLICATION
`
`FOR:
`
`METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR BROWSING USING
`
`MULTIPLE COORDINATED DEVICE SETS
`
`INVENTOR:
`
`RICHARD R. REISMAN
`
`MORGAN & FINNEGAN, LLP
`345 PARK A VENUE
`NEW YORK, NY 10154-0053
`(212) 758-4800
`(212) 751-6849 (FACSIMILE)
`WWW.MORGANFINNEGAN.COM
`
`725547 vi
`
`1
`
`/Ll.' EVD9 4892216LJS 1
`~ - - - - --
`
`-'---------~--
`
`,/
`
`

`

`TITLE OF THE INVENTION:
`
`Method And Apparatus For Browsing Using Multiple Coordinated Device Sets.
`
`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`Field of the Invention
`
`5
`
`The present invention is directed generally to interactive television and similar interactive
`
`hypermedia such as from television or Internet sources, and more particularly to the provision
`
`and use of user interfaces that permit interaction using of multiple coordinated device sets.
`
`Background of the Invention
`
`10
`
`While "convergence" of television (TV) and computer technology have been a major
`
`focus of innovation and commercial development since the early 1990s, particularly in the area
`
`of "interactive television" (ITV), there remains a huge gulf in the nature of the user experience of
`
`ITV and of computer-based media such as the World Wide Web. Convergence has taken hold in
`
`infrastructure technologies, with digital and computer-based TV (DTV) editing, production,
`
`15
`
`distribution, transmission, and devices. At heart ITV is a matter of hypermedia browsing, the
`
`process of browsing linked media resources like the Web, differing only on its emphasis on
`
`video as the central medium.
`
`However, there remains a divide relating to the dramatic difference in how TV-centric
`
`and computer-centric media are used, and to the cultural divide between the TV production and
`
`20
`
`distribution industry and the computer and Web industries that has prevented a convergence in
`
`user experience from developing or even being seen as possible and desirable. TV usage and
`
`directions are focused on its character as a lean-back, across-the-room, low resolution, and
`
`relatively passive, relaxed experience of couch potatoes viewing large, often shared TV screens
`
`725547 vi
`
`2
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`with simple remote controls. PC usage and directions are focused on its character as lean(cid:173)
`
`forward, up-close, high resolution, and intensive, highly interactive experiences of individuals
`
`with PC-styles displays, keyboards, and pointing devices. Variant device sets and applications,
`
`such as PDAs, tablets, and video games, could be taken as suggestive of the desirability of
`
`5
`
`selecting among alternative usage modes and form factors, but only very limited aspects of these
`
`suggestions have been recognized.
`
`The limitations of these radically disparate device set form factors have severely limited
`
`the appeal ofITV. ITV promises to greatly enrich the TV experience by allowing interactive
`
`features that can range from access to supplementary enhancement material such as background
`
`10
`
`.on programs, casts and players, sports statistics, polls, chat messaging, and interactive
`
`advertisements and purchase offers ("t-commerce"), and all manner of other tangential
`
`information, to ways to vary the core program content by acting on viewer input and choices as
`
`to camera angles or even alternative plots, as well as providing improved control of the core
`
`experience with electronic program guides (EPGs ), personal video recorders (PVRs) and video
`
`15
`
`on demand (VOD) and similar features.
`
`The problem is that these interactive features are not well served by the TV usage mode
`
`and form factor, and their use interferes with the basic TV experience. Rich interaction with a
`
`TV is inherently difficult. Presentation of information is limited by the poor capabilities of a TV
`
`screen for presenting text, menus, and navigations controls, and the crude input capabilities of a
`
`20
`
`remote control. The rich information and navigation functionality available on a Web browser or
`
`other PC-based user interface (e.g., UI, especially graphical user interfaces, GUis) must be
`
`"dumbed-down" and limited for use on a TV, and even use of high-definition TV (HDTV) may
`
`not significantly ease that-people do not like to read or do fine work from across-the-room, it is
`
`725547 vi
`
`3
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`just not comfortable ergonomics. Furthermore, the attempt to show interactive controls and
`
`enhancements on the TV interferes with viewing by the person interacting, as well as any other
`
`viewers in the room. Compounding these issues and slowing recognition of better solutions is
`
`the dominance of the cable TV industry, its struggles in developing and deploying the advanced
`
`5
`
`set-top boxes (STBs) needed to offer meaningful ITV services of the form it envisions, and its
`
`orientation to closed, proprietary systems that do not fully exploit or adapt to advances in the PC
`
`and Internet world.
`
`The computer community has attempted to market PCs that include a TV tuner to support
`
`TV function in a PC-centric model, as promoted by the PC-DTV Consortium. However, these
`
`10
`
`systems suffer from the converse problem, in that their form factors are not suited to the fact that
`
`most people do not want to watch TV at a PC, with its lean-forward, up-close form factor.
`
`Furthermore, such devices cannot effectively receive protected cable or satellite programming.
`
`And here, as with conventional TVs, the use of a single system forces technical, economical, and
`
`usage constraints on the inherently complex, multi-tasking, man-machine behavior that is desired
`
`15
`
`in a rich hypermedia browsing experience.
`
`There has also been some recognition that PCs provide a way around the limited installed
`
`base of advanced STBs, but this is generally perceived only as a limited stopgap. So called
`
`Enhanced TV or Extended TV or "telewebbing" has emerged to exploit the fact that tens of
`
`millions of households have PCs in the same room as their TVs, and can surf related content on
`
`20
`
`the Web while watching TV. Some broadcasters such as ABC and PBS have exploited this to
`
`offer Web content synchronized to a TV program, but it is the user who must coordinate the use
`
`of the PC with the TV, by finding the appropriate Web site. In spite of the fact that the installed
`
`base for such open hardware is some ten times that oflTV-capable set-top boxes, the ITV
`
`725547 vl
`
`4
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`community generally views such "two-box" solutions as an unfortunate and awkward stopgap
`
`that may be desirably supplanted by advanced "one-box" systems whose wide deployment must
`
`be awaited. Some major reasons for this lack of acceptance are that this simplistic two-box
`
`model supports only very limited, pre-defined synchronization of the availability of TV and
`
`5
`
`enhancement content that is built into a rigidly fixed two-box structure at the content source, and,
`
`even more importantly, that it completely fails to address any coordination of user activity at the
`
`two separate boxes.
`
`Across all of this, the key elements that are lacking are provision of a broadly flexible,
`
`powerful, selective, and simple user interface paradigm for browsing hypermedia across multiple
`
`10
`
`device sets, whether they are integrated or not, with related methods for user and/or authoring
`
`control of such a UI, and provision of an effective method for independent systems to coordinate
`
`browsing activities to enable such a user interface to be employed across multiple independent
`
`systems. Further lacking across all of these aspects is delivery of these services in a way that
`
`provides the user with a smoothly integrated experience in which interactions on the multiple
`
`15
`
`systems are coupled or decoupled to the degree appropriate to the task of the moment.
`
`Summary of Various Embodiments the Invention
`
`According to embodiments of the present invention there are provided systems and
`
`methods for navigating hypermedia using multiple coordinated input/output device sets.
`
`20
`
`Embodiments of the invention allow a user and/or an author to control what resources are
`
`presented on which device sets (whether they are integrated or not), and provide for coordinating
`
`browsing activities to enable such a user interface to be employed across multiple independent
`
`systems.
`
`725547 vi
`
`5
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`Brief Description of the Drawings
`
`Further aspects of the instant invention will be more readily appreciated upon review of
`
`the detailed description of the preferred embodiments included below when taken in conjunction
`
`5 with the accompanying drawings, of which:
`
`FIG. 1 is a block diagram of an exemplary assemblage of user systems, networks, and
`
`remote services for implementing certain embodiments of the present invention.
`
`FIG. 2 is a set of block diagrams of exemplary groupings of device sets and systems in
`
`the assemblage of FIG. 1.
`
`10
`
`FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram of a number of exemplary user interface display layouts
`
`according to certain embodiments of the present invention.
`
`FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram of an exemplary structure for state information relating to
`
`systems within the assemblage of FIG. 1, relating to the coordination of a multimachine user
`
`interface according to certain embodiments of the present invention.
`
`15
`
`FIG. 5 is a schematic diagram of an exemplary process, performed by the systems of FIG.
`
`1, for transferring state data according to certain embodiments of the present invention.
`
`FIG. 6 is a flow chart of an exemplary process, performed by the systems of FIG. 1, for
`
`transferring state data according to certain embodiments of the present invention.
`
`FIG. 7 is a set of block diagrams of exemplary alternative communication configurations
`
`20
`
`in the assemblage of FIG. 1.
`
`FIG. 8 is a block diagram of details of an exemplary portal facilitating session
`
`coordination linkage in the assemblage of FIG. 1.
`
`6
`
`725547 vi
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`Detailed Description of the Invention
`
`Overview
`
`The present invention may be described, in various embodiments, as a system and
`
`5 method for navigating hypermedia using multiple coordinated input/output device sets. It
`
`provides a broadly flexible, powerful, selective, and simple user interface paradigm for browsing
`
`that allows the user (and/or an author) to control what resources are presented on which device
`
`sets (whether they are integrated or not), and provides an effective method for coordinating
`
`browsing activities to enable such a user interface to be employed across multiple independent
`
`10
`
`systems.
`
`One aspect is, in the spirit of human-centered design, to anticipate and be responsive to
`
`the user's desires (and the author's suggestions) as to what resources to present where, in order
`
`to make the best possible use of the hardware resources at a user's disposal. Homes, offices, and
`
`other personal environments of the future will have a rich array of computer-based input output
`
`15
`
`devices of various kinds, some general purpose, and some more or less dedicated to specific
`
`uses. The desire is to minimize constraints on what system resources can be used for a given
`
`task, to enable the most powerful browsing experience possible. Browsing of hypermedia, such
`
`as in the case ofITV is a task in which the use of multiple devices might be valuable because it
`
`may be expected to be a dominant activity, if supported effectively, and because of the disparity
`
`20
`
`ofUI issues between watching extended video segments and doing intensive interactions (such
`
`as with Web media) that may be more or less closely coupled with such video segments.
`
`Prior work has generally not recognized that it is inherent in rich ITV and similar forms
`
`of video-centric hypermedia browsing to be best served as "two-box," multitasking experiences,
`
`7
`
`725547 vi
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`at least much of the time, and the problem is not to squeeze it into one box (and fight over which
`
`box's functionality and form factor is better), but to enable effective coordination of both boxes.
`
`While the TV vendors and the PC vendors might fervently wish to offer a single system that
`
`meets the needs of ITV users, that is not an effective solution. If one assumes that an ideal level
`
`5
`
`of coordination among device sets can be enabled and explores usage scenarios, it can then be
`
`seen that different modes of viewing are best served by different device set form factors. These
`
`modes are not fixed for the duration of a session or task, but can blend, overlap, and vary as the
`
`flow of a set of linked tasks changes. What begins as a TV -centric browsing ( or pure viewing)
`
`experience may shift to casual use of a PC for light interaction (such as looking at menus and
`
`10
`
`options or doing a quick lookup) to intensive PC-centric activity (and then back again). The user
`
`may shift focus from the TV to both, to primarily the PC for a time, then become involved in the
`
`TV again. Conversely, an user at a PC may shift to immersion in a TV program or movie, then
`
`return to intensive use of the PC. While some broad usage patterns tend to favor video on the
`
`lean-back TV device set and interactivity on the lean-forward PC-type device set, other issues
`
`15 may relate to incidental viewing of video from a PC centric phase of activity, and casual
`
`interactions with enhancements in a TV -centric experience, as well as a complex mix of
`
`secondary issues, such as quality-of-service factors, whether an alternative device set is at hand
`
`and ready for use, other activities, presence of other people, location/setting, mood, and the like.
`
`The point in a session at which a user may wish to shift device sets may depend not only on the
`
`20
`
`immediate task, but the user's expectation of where that task is leading, so an intensive task soon
`
`to end may not warrant a shift from TV to PC, but a less intensive task leading to deeper
`
`interaction may warrant an early shift. Varying form factors of different TV devices and of the
`
`range of PCs, PD As, tablets, and Internet appliances may also affect what tasks a user wants to
`
`8
`
`725547 vl
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003USI
`
`do on what device, with what UL At the same time, to avoid burdening the user with the
`
`complications of too much flexibility and too many choices, it may be desirable that both the
`
`user and the content author be able to pre-set affinities, preferences, and recommendations,
`
`relating to task types, content types, and device availabilities, that could automatically place
`
`5
`
`elements on the device set or device set group that is presumably best suited to the apparent
`
`context, while leaving the user with the ability to recognize that expected targeting (based on
`
`conventions and/or unobtrusive cues) and to accept it with no further action, or override it if
`
`desired.
`
`Providing the desired flexibility can be viewed in terms of three interrelated issues, one
`
`10
`
`of structuring an effective and flexible multimachine user interface (MMUI) for browsing by a
`
`user, one of providing methods (such as markup) for the resource creator/author/producer to aid
`
`in exploiting that MMUI, and one of implementing such an interface on a wide range of
`
`hardware and software, including systems for which such usage may not be a primary mission
`
`(including both new systems and legacy systems).
`
`15
`
`A general approach to a MMUI for browsing that provides both user control and
`
`authoring support may advantageously build on the concept of targets for presentation oflinked
`
`resources already present in hypermedia formats such as HTML (and XLink). In HTML, the
`
`link target attribute can be used to specify which of multiple frames a linked resource is to be
`
`presented in, with options that include the current frame, another existing frame, or a new frame.
`
`20
`
`Coded specifications within the link are typically set by authors/producers of content, and
`
`controls in the browser allow the user to override and alter these settings, such as (with
`
`MICROSOFT Internet Explorer, MSIE) by using a shift-click combination to indicate that a link
`
`should be opened in a new window. Extending this to an MMUI can be done by expanding the
`
`725547 vl
`
`9
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`coding of target attributes and by adding new browser control options, such as control-click, to
`
`target a window on an alternate device set. Additional control can be achieved by extending the
`
`richer drop-down control that is invoked in MSIE by right-clicking on a link. That drop-down
`
`list can be extended to list windows on alternate device sets. This provides a very flexible,
`
`5
`
`general, and simple way to shift activity from one device set to another. Similar controls can be
`
`provided on simpler devices, such as for example, with a TV remote control, instead of select to
`
`activate a link to an enhancement overlay on the TV, a combination such as exit-select could be
`
`used to activate that link to an associated PC, or a new control button could be provided. As
`
`with current browsers, variations on such controls can also be defined to open the current
`
`10
`
`resource at a second location ( cloning).
`
`To implement such an interface on multiple independent device sets, the ending system
`
`must be given information to inform it when a link is to be activated, to what resource, with what
`
`browser attributes, and with what context information. A basic method is to transfer from the
`
`starting system to the ending system a link activation message that that includes a state record
`
`15
`
`and contains relevant link arc information. The state record contains essential information on the
`
`state of the browser and related activities on the starting system that can be used at the ending
`
`system to configure its browser and related context accordingly. A state
`
`exporter/importer/tracker component may be provided as an addition to a standard browser to
`
`provide these functions (with exporter/importer function being sufficient for simple
`
`20
`
`applications).
`
`In simple embodiments, export from the starting system and import at the ending system
`
`need be done only once per transfer of locus. In certain embodiments, full event synchronization
`
`can be maintained, when desired, by the state tracker to provide ongoing collaborative
`
`10
`
`725547 vi
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`functionality, as well. This is useful in the case of multiple users, and also can be useful for a
`
`single user that desires the ability to use both device sets in a fully replicated mode. However an
`
`advantage of the proposed method over conventional collaboration and synchronization systems,
`
`is that such ongoing event synchronization is not needed for basic MMUI browsing by a single
`
`5
`
`user, and the complications and overhead of continually logging, exporting and importing all
`
`events that may alter state can be avoided. Instead, state information need be assembled for
`
`transfer only when a transfer is actually invoked, and only at the necessary granularity. This
`
`simple, occasional, coarse-grained transfer is readily added to any browser of existing
`
`architecture, unlike more fine-grained full synchronization approaches, which require either
`
`10
`
`· excessive tracking activity, display replication approaches, or rearchitecting of browsing to use
`
`model-view-controller architectures, such as in event replication approaches.
`
`Another key benefit of this method is that it is readily applied to heterogeneous systems
`
`with only simple addition of an exporter/importer and some new UI functions to each system's
`
`own native browser. This exploits the fact that the underlying resources being browsed can be
`
`15
`
`common to all systems, and that at a high level, browsing state is relatively independent of
`
`system architecture. Thus the method is readily applied to both TV and PC-based systems, and
`
`could be added to existing or new systems by manufacturers, integrators, distributors, service
`
`providers, or by end users themselves. The proposed methods are well suited to standardization,
`
`which could facilitate the inherent capability of the methods described here to allow any suitably
`
`20
`
`functional device sets and systems to be used together in the desired coordinated fashion,
`
`regardless of its internal software and hardware architecture, vendor, or provisioning. Use of
`
`XML, RDF, and related standards is suggested to facilitate this. These features for ad hoc
`
`provisioning and use of devices acquired for other purposes removes a major hurdle to the
`
`11
`
`725547 vi
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`introduction of MMUis for ITV and other hypermedia browsing applications. Thus, for
`
`example, a household need not buy a lean forward device for ITV, but can simply use an existing
`
`PC, PDA, tablet, or the like.
`
`As a further perspective on the range of ways to use a MMUI for interactive TV and
`
`5
`
`similar hypermedia browsing as described herein it may be helpful, perhaps with regard to varied
`
`levels of multitasking and (correspondingly) of how closely enhancement resources relate to the
`
`viewing of a "primary program", to consider the term "interactivity." The term "interactive TV"
`
`might tend to suggest that a viewer interacts with a TV device and/or with TV content. Such a
`
`view may be appropriate to many kinds of ITV interaction. However, in considering the
`
`IO · ,. · embodiments of MMUI browsing described herein, it .is noted that many cases of what might be
`
`broadly described in terms of "interactive TV" could involve interactions that need not directly
`
`involve the TV device, or even the actual program content that is "on the TV", but that, for
`
`instance, involve other content perhaps more or less closely related to the program content that is
`
`on the TV.
`
`15
`
`From such a standpoint, the term "coactivity" might be considered as useful to emphasize
`
`the possible distinction between what is interacted with and what is on TV. Thus, for example,
`
`in the case of a loosely coupled interactive sub-task on a PC that relates to a program on the TV,
`
`the interactivity that takes place as part of that sub-task might be described as "coactivity".
`
`The concept of coactivity could be useful, for instance, in clarifying certain motivations
`
`20
`
`for using a MMUI. To the extent that one might think of a task as "interacting with the TV," the
`
`idea of using another device set (for example, a PC) might seem odd and unnatural to the task.
`
`However, by recognizing that many interactive tasks actually involve coactivity with content that
`
`might not be "on the TV", but that relates to what is on the TV, the use of a separate device set
`
`12
`
`725547 vl
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`might be more readily recognized as possibly being natural and appropriate. Accordingly, "two(cid:173)
`
`box" embodiments of the present invention could be seen as potentially well suited to the
`
`essential nature of ITV and similar hypermedia browsing, and not as a "stopgap" or "work(cid:173)
`
`around" embodiments.
`
`5
`
`As used herein, the term "hypermedia" is meant to refer to any kind of media that may
`
`have the effect of a non-linear structure of associated elements represented as a network of
`
`information-containing nodes interconnected by relational links. Hypermedia is meant to include
`
`"hypertext", and the two may at.times be used synonymously in the broad sense, but where
`
`stated or otherwise clear in context, "hypertext" can refer particularly to text content, and
`
`10
`
`·"hypermedia" to extend that to content that includes other formats such as graphics, video, and
`
`sound. The terminology used herein is meant of be generally consistent with that used in World
`
`Wide Web Consortium (W3C) recommendations.
`
`The associations of elements may be specified as "hyperlinks" or "links," such as
`
`described by the XLink (XML Linking Language), SMIL (Synchronized Multimedia Integration
`
`15
`
`Language), HTML, XHTML, and similar W3C recommendations. Links define an association
`
`between a "starting resource," the source from which link traversal is begun, and an "ending
`
`resource," the destination, collectively referred to as "participating resources." A "resource" is
`
`used to refer to any addressable unit of information or service and may at times refer to a
`
`resource portion rather than a whole resource, and a "content resource" to refer to any resource
`
`20
`
`suited to presentation to a user. In the context of hypermedia, "node" may be used
`
`synonymously with resource. "Navigation" is meant to refer to the process of following or
`
`"traversing" links. Unless specifically indicated as "link navigation" or otherwise clear in
`
`context, navigation also is meant to include the control of presentation within a resource, such as
`
`13
`
`725547 vi
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`scrolling, panning, and zooming, using VCR-like controls to play a continuous media resource,
`
`and the like. Addresses for Internet resources are typically in the form of Universal Resource
`
`Locators (URLs) or Universal Resource Names (URNs) or other Universal Resource Identifiers
`
`(URls), but may be based on any other suitable addressing mechanism. Hypermedia resources
`
`5 may contain content (also referred to as mediadata) and metadata (including hyperlinks), aspects
`
`of a resource may be declarative (such as markup) or procedural (such as embedded logic or
`
`program code elements) and may include embedded resources.
`
`Links may have information about how to traverse a pair of resources, including direction
`
`and application behavior information, called an "arc," and such information may include link
`
`10
`
`"elements" having ~'attributes" that take on "values." Behavior attributes include "show" to
`
`specify how to handle the current state of the presentation at the time the link is activated,
`
`"external" to specify whether the link is to be opened in the current application, or an external
`
`application, such as one suited to a special media type, "activate" to specify whether the link is
`
`triggered by some event, typically user interaction, or automatically traversed when its time span
`
`15
`
`is active, and "target" to specify either the existing display environment in which the link should
`
`be opened (e.g., a SMIL region, an HTML frame or another named window), or trigger the
`
`creation of a new display environment with the given name. It should be noted that the term
`
`target is sometimes also used in the art to refer to an ending resource as the target of a link, as for
`
`a "target resource" or "target page."
`
`20
`
`Links may be contained in the starting or ending resource, "outbound" or "inbound"
`
`respectively, or may be independently stored as "third-party" arcs. Standard HTML links are
`
`typically outbound, but inbound and third-party link arcs may be useful, such as for adding links
`
`that are external to read-only or third-party content. By providing such external, third-party
`
`14
`
`725547 vi
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`links, resources not originally intended to be used as hypermedia can be made into hypermedia.
`
`Third-party links may be collected in "linkbases." Linkbases may be directly associated with
`
`their starting resources by a resource that leads to both the starting resource and the linkbase,
`
`referred to herein as "coupled" linkbases, such as a set of image map links in a Web page that
`
`5
`
`has an embedded image link, or may be "decoupled" and obtained by other means.
`
`Where so indicated or clear in context, the term hypermedia may also be used to include
`
`"hypermedia-like" resources and systems that do not use coded links as such, but which support
`
`functionally similar non-linear resource relationships using other more or less similar
`
`mechanisms, such as special coding and logic that implements structures such as menu structures
`
`10 ··
`
`that have a defined graph structure, transaction request forms that have.an.associated address or
`
`other process identifier for transaction submission, and selectable content elements having a
`
`defined relationship to other resources or actions. Use of VCR-like or audio recorder-like
`
`controls to add non-linearity to a linear medium ( e.g., fast forward/reverse, and skip ahead), also
`
`referred to as "trick-play" functionality, is also considered as hypermedia-like.
`
`15
`
`According to embodiments of the invention, links may refer to specific portions of a node
`
`or resource, such a by an "anchor" that associates the link to a position in text (such as in a
`
`HTML "A element"), or an "area" or "region" that associates the link to a spatial portion of an
`
`object's visual display, or to non-spatial portions, such as temporal subparts that may be defined
`
`by "begin" and "end" attributes, also referred to as "time positions" or together as a "time scope"
`
`20
`
`or "time-span." Similar facilities are provided by XPointer, which supports addressing into the
`
`internal structures of XML documents, and provides an "origin" function to enable addressing
`
`relative to third-party and inbound links. Unless otherwise indicated or clear in context,
`
`"anchor" may used herein to be synonymous with similar forms, such as origin and "area."
`
`15
`
`725547 vi
`
`

`

`Docket No. 4138-4003US1
`
`Hypermedia structures may also be und