Classifications

• • G—PHYSICS
  • G06—COMPUTING OR CALCULATING; COUNTING
  • G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
  • G06F16/00—Information retrieval; Database structures therefor; File system structures therefor
  • G06F16/90—Details of database functions independent of the retrieved data types
  • G06F16/95—Retrieval from the web
  • G06F16/955—Retrieval from the web using information identifiers, e.g. uniform resource locators [URL]
  • G06F16/9562—Bookmark management

Definitions

• the present invention relates to a method of searching for objects for carrying out complex searches, that is to say from multiple sources, at least one of which is a user source, managed by a user, and at least one other source. is a supplier source, managed by a supplier, said method allowing on the one hand to submit a request identical to these two types of sources, then to synthesize the results, and on the other hand to manage in an independent and flexible way the objects of the user source.
• the user can thus build up over time an increasingly exhaustive base of objects, which he can enrich and personalize thanks to the addition of attributes.
• Subsequent searches are then carried out taking into account not only the objects selected by the user, but also the attributes he has associated with each of the objects. The results of subsequent research are therefore more precise, more relevant and clearer thanks to these elements.
• the invention also provides the corresponding search system, comprising an analysis module for synthesizing the results from various sources, and a management module, allowing the user to manage the objects of his choice as he pleases.
• the invention finds its application in particular in the context of the search for objects, such as websites or web pages on a public network such as the Internet.
• the objects can also be files, texts, photos, images, etc., which the user wishes to find on various databases made available to him, free or paid.
• the results of the research carried out are presented according to criteria specific to each product. Most of the time, the user does not even know the basis on which the results are ordered or presented. Furthermore, it cannot influence this arrangement.
• the order of presentation of the results is then established according to the importance of these addresses as indicated in the centralized database. This importance results from the indications provided by all users of the service.
• a copy (“buffer”) of the favorites is temporarily stored locally at the level of the user's station, then, when the local work is carried out, the copy is retransmitted at the central base for consultation and centralization of the data.
• the information is managed, processed, stored, etc., by a service provider, independent of the user. If it is not accessible for technical, commercial or other reasons, the information is no longer available.
• the document EP 1 030 247 relates on the one hand to a system and a method making it possible to share information relating to favorites between several users, and on the other hand to a system and a method enabling a user to have access to its favorites from a plurality of posts.
• the user can select part of the information he wishes to share, and keep the rest. He can also select the recipients by identifiers or by categories, such as centers of interest.
• identifiers or by categories such as centers of interest.
• Information is shared through a remote server and database. Information is managed by a supplier, not
• Kart_mot_intel_pct not by the user.
• This document discloses various embodiments in which the information is stored either locally, or remotely, or in hybrid mode, that is to say with a remote copy of the information stored locally. Synchronization with a server makes it possible to exchange information. According to the other embodiment, a remote database allows a user to store the information which is accessible from any station which can be connected to the server.
• the information managed remotely or locally is the same.
• This information is managed, processed, stored, etc., by a service provider, independent of the user. If it is not accessible for technical, commercial or other reasons, the information is no longer available. Furthermore, a possible search carried out in such a system would allow access to a single source of information.
• Document US 6,493,702 describes a method and a system for sharing favorites for improving searches and recommending certain documents from a collection or database.
• a centralized database makes it possible to manage favorites individually for each user and globally using a common part, for a community of users. The user can select what he wants to place in any of these areas.
• the system automatically establishes a number of attributes relating to popularity, availability, etc. Some data can be temporarily imported locally, the time to perform certain operations. However, given the considerable mass of data available, this possibility has many limitations, due in particular to access and transfer times which can sometimes be long.
• the system consults on the one hand the database of the system, and on the other hand a search engine. The results are then ordered, and presented.
• the origin of the documents for example the database
• the information in the database is managed, processed, stored, etc., by a service provider, independent of the user.
• the searches carried out in such a system are carried out from the database and from a search engine. It is therefore always data or sources managed by third parties, on which
• Kart_mot_intel_pct the user has no influence.
• the attributes are standard in nature, impersonal and created to correspond to a large audience, which even goes against the user's personalization needs. If either supplier is not accessible for technical, commercial or other reasons, the information is no longer available.
• the invention proposes a method of searching for objects from multiple sources for a digital system comprising a microprocessor and at least one memory unit, said method consisting in:
• At least one user file (U) located locally with respect to a user station and intended to be managed by a local user, said user file (U) being capable of comprising a plurality of user objects (OU) specifically selected by a user and comprising at least one user attribute assigned by a user;
• the invention provides, in a way, an intelligent search means, allowing on the one hand to consult files or public sources, made available by various suppliers, and one or more user files, containing personalized objects, often objects that the user wants to be able to find quickly and easily.
• the fact of searching in these two types of environment makes it possible to take into account on the one hand the objects already known to the user, these objects having been personalized in order to facilitate their identification among a large number of objects, and on the other hand share of new objects, for example newer, or updated, not listed by the user.
• These two criteria have hitherto been contradictory and the user could not carry out a complete search while truly taking into account the objects which he had already identified, selected and analyzed, in order to personalize them in an optimal manner.
• the user file (U) is advantageously located locally in relation to the user station.
• the file can be located on a storage device on the user's computer, such as a hard disk. This allows in particular to ensure the user complete freedom to intervene as he wishes on the file and manage it according to his own wishes, in complete independence.
• the information is managed, processed, stored, etc., by the local user, independent of any external provider. There is therefore no risk of being in a situation of inaccessibility of data, as is the case when the data is stored with a provider located remotely and that this one is not accessible for reasons technical, commercial or other, with the consequence that the information is no longer available.
• the supplier file (P) is preferably located at a distance from the user station and accessible by at least temporary connection with said station.
• It may for example be a website offering information search services, having a large source of objects stored in one or more databases housed in servers located at said service provider.
• said comparison criteria (CP) include taking into account user attributes associated with objects from the user file (U).
• the attributes of user objects are used in particular during the steps of comparison and display or presentation of the synthesized results. For example, during the comparison, the fact that the user objects have specific attributes makes it possible to recognize them, possibly to classify them in a specific manner, for example with attributes of help with classification.
• presenting the results there are different ways to highlight these objects over the objects of a supplier. For example, user objects can be classified at the top of the presentation list; certain attributes can be displayed or presented or generate the display of certain signs or codes allowing the user, either to recognize an object, or to recall a concept, a notion, an idea, a fact, etc., thanks to a attribute provided for this purpose.
• At least part of the user objects (OU) have been selected from the results of previous searches.
• the user can gradually build a set or grouping of objects in which he can subsequently search while retaining access to a larger public set in order to allow the scalability of this set.
• the user can at his discretion memorize what interests him, by personalizing it.
• the user can add objects to his file which he has found elsewhere, or which he himself has created.
• the user file Since the user file is managed by the user himself, he can take the necessary measures to ensure the sustainability of the content. Thus, if the basic supplier (s) are no longer available or no longer supply certain or all of the objects, the user keeps all the data and the corresponding accesses. It can also make security backups.
• the user can, thanks to the attributes he associates with the objects he selects, influence the results of subsequent searches, because preferably, the comparison made by the analysis module takes into account the
• Kart_mot_intel_pct attributes of user file objects This allows for example to favor the positioning of certain objects compared to others, to present the attributes with the list of results, so that the user can more easily recognize his own objects, or to remember observations , comments, notes, analyzes, etc., which he was able to make beforehand.
• the search is advantageously carried out in each of the files by a search tool associated with the file.
• the tool is then preferably located in the same environment as the file in which the objects are sought: either remotely from the user station for a remote file, or at the user station for a local file such as a user file.
• the comparison preferably aims to identify in priority any object present in a preferential source.
• the preferred source is advantageously the user source or file. In this way, we thus favor objects known to the user, either because these objects are likely to be among his favorite objects, or because these objects include markers or attributes likely to serve as means of identification facilitating the interpretation of research results.
• an object that interests the user is no longer available in a supplier file, the user who searches for it again is not penalized, since this object will be identified thanks to the user file, in which it has been previously personalized and memorized.
• the comparison aims to identify any object present in at least two sources including a supplier source and a user source. This type of information often makes it possible to highlight particularly relevant objects.
• the comparison makes it possible to give priority to any object (OR) originating from a user file (U).
• OR object
• U user file
• Kart_mot_intel_pct object with a high rating for this user
• an object with personal comments etc.
• the comparison makes it possible to keep the same object identified in several sources only once during a search. We then aim to eliminate duplicates.
• an object identified in more than one source is given a particular attribute.
• Such an object has indeed a probability of being more relevant than others which are not referenced in several sources.
• the possible raw results coming from a user file (U) are presented or displayed, then, when the possible results from a supplier file (P) are available, the comparison of the results from the two different types of file is carried out and the objects of the synthesized result which have not not already presented before said comparison are in turn presented.
• This feature makes it possible to apply the research process sequentially. For example, before proceeding to compare the raw results, we can present the first available results. In the case where a user file is available locally, the results from the consultation of this file are often available very quickly. These results can thus be displayed or presented to the user in a very short period of time. Subsequently, when the results from the consultation of remote files are available, the comparison is carried out using the analysis module. Since the results of the user file are already presented, it suffices to present the other objects. We thus obtain a possibility of staggering the presentation of results over time, by benefiting from the almost immediate availability of user objects (U), then by completing thereafter with supplier objects (P) found later.
• U user objects
• P supplier objects
• the user does not waste time art_mot_intel_pct and benefits almost instantly from what is quickly available to them. Since the objects identified in the user file are likely to be relevant, this possibility of almost instantaneous display is particularly interesting. Indeed, many users repeatedly make the same requests, in order to find the objects that are well known to them. A quick presentation of these results is therefore particularly relevant.
• the results are removed from the user source, and the synthesized result is then displayed.
• the supplier file (s) can be the same as at the origin or others. Such a characteristic makes it possible to preserve the independence of the user with respect to a given object supplier.
• the searches in the user files and the supplier files can be carried out either in parallel or successively.
• the method also comprises the following steps, consisting in:
• selection means allowing the selection of at least one object (OR, OP) of the synthesized result (RS) and personalization means, making it possible to personalize said object by means of at least one attribute associated with this object; -store said personalized object in said user file (U).
• Said user file is intended for subsequent searches, so that, after a search, when objects have been found, the user can personalize the objects of his choice with attributes.
• a subsequent search one searches on the one hand for standard objects in a reference set and on the other hand for personalized objects, and the results are compared and / or analyzed and / or processed.
• Kart_mot_intel_pct for any object stored in a user file, the request having allowed the identification of this object is also kept in said user file, with a link between the request and the object.
• the search performed at the user file level can be performed on the basis of the query. If the query exists in the user file, the objects - that is to say the results - stored and associated with this query can be quickly presented, by substantially reducing the number of elements to be consulted.
• the request is also submitted to the reference set. Any new objects found can be presented to the user, who may or may not store them in a user file.
• the invention also provides software comprising code elements programmed for the implementation of the above method, when said software is loaded into a computer system and executed by said computer system.
• the invention also provides software in the form of a product recorded on a medium readable by a computer system, comprising code elements programmed for the implementation of the above method, when said software is loaded into a computer system and executed by said system. computer science.
• the invention furthermore provides a method for searching and processing objects from multiple sources for a digital system comprising a microprocessor, at least one memory unit, said method consisting in:
• Kart_mot_intel_pct being capable of comprising a plurality of user objects (OU) specifically selected by a user and comprising at least one user attribute assigned by a user;
• the user file is then available for further research.
• the invention provides a system for searching and processing objects for a digital system comprising a microprocessor, at least one memory unit and allowing the operation of a search engine, comprising:
• Kart_mot_intel_pct a requester, capable of formulating a request on the basis of information supplied by a user and of transmitting this request to at least one search tool; a user file (U), located locally in relation to the user station, adapted to contain objects specifically selected by a user and managed by the user;
• P supplier file
• U user file
• the objects resulting from a complex search are advantageously presented to the user, for example by display on the screen of a user station.
• the search system can process objects from multiple sources so as to prepare an "enriched" result comprising, on the one hand, objects from the user file and, on the other hand, objects from a file. supplier responding to the same request.
• Kart_mot_ ⁇ ntel_pct synthesized result allows for example to avoid presenting several times an object present in several sources. Objects can be classified and / or sorted globally, that is to say for all the objects found from all the sources in which the search is carried out. Such a global list is more useful for the user than a simple banal juxtaposition of results, in which there would be no real unity, therefore frequent repetitions, poorly ordered rankings, etc.
• the manager or tool for processing objects allows you to give one or more attributes to objects, to modify them, update them, complete them, delete them, etc., either from a selection offered for example in the form from a menu, either from the user's own entries.
• the user therefore has complete freedom to manage their objects according to their own wishes and tastes, without constraint. Most often following a search, the user selects a found object which interests him or which he wishes to keep.
• Personalization tools allow him to select or create one or more attributes for each of the objects of his choice. The whole, the object and the associated attributes, can then be memorized by storage in a user file.
• the requester is materialized locally by means of computer elements (such as memory and / or microprocessor, etc.) from the environment of the user's station.
• the requester is therefore preferably in cooperation or connection with the station of the user so that a connection with the outside is not necessary for the transmission of data between the station and the requester.
• the software for implementing the process is loaded and operational, the requester is then preferably created at
• art_mot_intel_pct level of the functional elements of a station such as a microprocessor and / or memory elements of the station.
• the user file (U) is materialized locally by means of computer elements (such as memory and / or microprocessor, etc.) from the environment of the user's station.
• the user file is therefore preferably in cooperation or connection with the user station so that an external connection is not necessary for the transmission of data between the station and the user file.
• the software for implementing the method is loaded and operational, the user file is then preferably created at the level of the functional elements of a station such as a microprocessor and / or of memory elements of the station.
• the supplier file (P) is materialized remotely by means of computer elements (such as memory and / or microprocessor, etc.) located outside the environment of the user's station.
• the supplier file is therefore preferably in cooperation or connection with the user's station by means of a link with the outside allowing the transmission of data between the station and the supplier file. It can be a simple telephone link, an inter-network connection such as the Internet, a cable, satellite link, etc.
• the requester (R), the analysis module (MA) and the manager (G) of user file (U) are located locally with respect to the station of the user.
• the analysis module performs a comparison between the objects (OP) identified in the supplier file and the objects (OU) identified in the user file on the basis of comparison criteria (CP) previously defined, so as to generate a synthesized result.
• Kart_mot_intel_pct The comparison or sorting criteria can be inherent to the system, or established by the user, or a combination of these two possibilities. If the criteria are selected by the user, they can be selected either from a predefined list or from user input. As an example of criteria, let us quote: the rating or notation, the size of an object, the number of keywords of the query found in the object or the distance of the object from the keywords, the date of an object, the rate of use of an object such as a website, the frequency of updating, etc.
• the analysis module (MA) is materialized locally by means of computer elements (such as memory and / or microprocessor, etc.) of the environment of the user's station.
• the analysis module is therefore preferably in cooperation or connection with the user's station so that a connection with the outside is not necessary for the transmission of data between the station and said module.
• the analysis module is then preferably created at the level of the functional elements of a station such as a microprocessor and / or memory elements of the station.
• the object manager (G) is materialized locally by means of computer elements (such as memory and / or microprocessor, etc.) from the environment of the user's station.
• the manager is therefore preferably in cooperation or connection with the user's station so that a connection with the outside is not necessary for the transmission of data between the station and said manager.
• the manager is then preferably created at the level of the functional elements of a station such as a microprocessor and / or memory elements of the station.
• the method involves the use of at least one research tool.
• the search tool (s) are tools of known type, and widely used by both professional users and individuals. It is also possible, according to an alternative embodiment, to replace or supplement one or the other of the search tool (s)
• Kart_mot_intel_pct search by a connector or adapter or translator which ensures perfect compatibility with the source consulted and to recover data without format problem.
• the user search tool (mU) is associated and preferably near the user file.
• the supplier search tool (mP) is associated and preferably near the supplier file.
• At least one search tool is replaced or supplemented by a connector which makes it possible to ensure perfect compatibility with the source consulted and to recover the data without format problem.
• the invention provides software comprising code elements programmed for the implementation of the object search and processing system as described above, when said software is loaded into a computer system and executed by said computer system.
• This software is advantageously in the form of a product recorded on a medium readable by a computer system, comprising programmed code elements as described above.
• the comparison between the raw results from a user type source (U) and supplier type source (P) is carried out using an analysis module (MA), based on comparison criteria (CP) previously defined (before the search), between the objects (OP) identified in the supplier file and the objects (OU) identified in the user file so as to generate a synthesized result.
• MA analysis module
• CP comparison criteria
• Figure 1 illustrates a schematic representation of a system according to the invention
• Figure 2 illustrates a variant of the system of Figure 1
• Figures 3, 4 and 5 illustrate examples of structures of the different types of U and P files
• Figures 6, 7 and 8 illustrate the different steps of the method according to the invention
• Figures 9 and 10 illustrate the two main search modes in the U and P files
• Figures 11 to 13 present examples of the interface for searching and managing objects.
• User it can be a person or a group of people, but in this case, it is a specific group, such as family members, a group, 'a club, etc, whose members are known and in limited number, as opposed to a community of users whose members are not necessarily known and the number of users remains open and potentially unlimited.
• User file (U) this type of file, adapted to contain the objects specifically selected by the user, is created, for example during the installation or configuration of the device or system according to the invention.
• the file U is located at a distance from the station 1 of the user.
• the file can then be stored on a remote server, another station, but located remotely, at a remote service provider, etc.
• the file is located locally, ie at the level of the
• Kart_mot_intel_pct the user, as illustrated, either in his environment, for example in a peripheral or within a local network.
• User objects are the objects selected by the user for storage in a user file. These objects preferably include one or more attributes given by the user. These objects can be of the most diverse nature and format. It can be addresses or names of sites or Web pages, references of documents, books, texts, files of all types (images, various data, etc.).
• Supplier this is an information supplier, in particular of objects such as addresses or names of websites.
• a supplier is accessible by at least temporary connection.
• a site offering a search engine service can advantageously serve as a supplier.
• Any provider of any type of data can also be a provider according to this definition.
• Supplier file (P) This is a storage space, in which a plurality of objects are made available to users, such as Internet users, researchers, etc.
• the objects in this file, their classification, their updates, their availability, etc., are managed by one or more suppliers or service providers, other than the user.
• the user has no direct influence on the content of a file: he does not have the possibility of freely modifying the content of a supplier file as he wishes.
• certain data concerning the users can be kept by a supplier, in a supplier file. But this data is controlled, managed by the supplier, not by the user.
• Supplier objects these are the objects available in supplier files. They can have attributes. These objects can be of the most diverse nature and format. It can be addresses or names of sites or Web pages, references of documents, books, texts, files of all types (images, various data, etc.).
• art_mot_intel_pct Complex search this is a search carried out in at least two different types of sources, including at least one user source or file and at least one supplier source or file, the same request being submitted to the different sources.
• User attributes these are the attributes conferred by a user by means of the manager or tool for processing objects.
• Requestor from instructions provided by a user, such as one or more keywords, the requester generates or formats a request, making it possible to search for specific objects among one or more larger sets, sometimes including a number considerable objects.
• a request can thus be submitted to various sources such as supplier or user files in which one wishes to search for information.
• the requester may possibly offer choices or menus to the user, in particular for entering keywords.
• the quester can also receive the basic indications from a system or software intended to generate keywords or queries.
• FIG. 1 illustrates an example of implementation of the method and the device according to the invention.
• a computer device such as a user station 1, comprising at least one microprocessor 2 cooperating with memory elements 3, means 4 for remote access such as for example a modem 5 connected to a type link Internet 6, different elements can be materialized or implemented: a requester R, an analysis module MA, a manager G, a user file U, a user search tool mU.
• the requester R is intended to formulate and transmit requests or interrogations on the basis of information generally supplied by a user.
• the information useful for formulating the requests can come from another system or software specially provided for this purpose.
• Inter-element links 14 make it possible to connect the various components or elements of the station, either to each other, or to remote access means 4. These remote access means make it possible to connect, when necessary, the user station to remote elements, located outside the user station or outside the local network of this station.
• These elements relate in particular to sources or files P supplier of data or objects such as websites or Web pages, likely to contain information, objects, or other, interesting and / or useful for the user.
• a supplier search tool mP is advantageously associated with the supplier file, so as to allow searches to be carried out efficiently and quickly.
• the MA analysis module is designed to analyze the raw results of complex research. It is linked, at least temporarily, on the one hand to the supplier file P, and on the other hand to the user file U, from which it receives the raw results, by means of a tool such as a search tool, respectively.
• a tool such as a search tool, respectively.
• mP and mU for P and U files.
• a single search tool is provided for searching in the different sources.
• FIG. 2 presents an advantageous variant, in which the source or user file U is provided at the level of the user's station (unlike FIG. 1, where the user file is provided remotely). It can be located either directly within the station, or at the level of a peripheral associated with this station. It can also be provided within a local or internal network, requiring no connection to the outside. This embodiment is particularly advantageous since it allows the user to independently manage his or her user files.
• FIG. 3 illustrates a schematic or theoretical example of a supplier file (P).
• P supplier file
• Kart_mot_intel_pct large collection of objects.
• a supplier file can contain one or more attributes, although this is not mandatory.
• the attributes are then those given either by the supplier himself, or by the creator of the object, or by a third party, but not by a user of the method or of the device according to the invention.
• Certain attributes, such as for example the attribute “a” in the example illustrated, can be common to several objects.
• Figures 4 and 5 illustrate simple examples of user files (U).
• the file comprises, in addition to the objects and their respective attributes, the formulated requests (or keywords) which have made it possible to identify these objects.
• the "aerial company" request four objects were stored by the user. Other objects may have been found during the search, but the user did not consider it appropriate to keep them in his file. The user gave an attribute to three of the four memorized objects. These attributes can be identical or different from those coming from the supplier of the objects. Often, the user gives an attribute which corresponds to him personally, which corresponds to his tastes or habits, and which would therefore be different if it had to be given by another user. This customization allows the user to facilitate consultation of subsequent searches.
• FIG. 6 presents a functional diagram illustrating the method according to the invention.
• any object found in more than one file can be processed so that it is presented only once in the results.
• a possible indication can relate to the fact that this object has been identified several times, which can be a sign of relevance of the object.
• OU objects are considered in a specific way, thanks to their attributes. It is thus possible either to present them at the top of the list of results, and / or to present the attributes (or some of them). The user therefore easily and quickly finds the objects he already knows, since he has already processed them with the manager in order to keep them in a user file.
• FIG. 7 presents a diagram of the same type as that of FIG. 6, but with an alternative embodiment of the method.
• the OR objects selected or identified in one or more user files are advantageously presented or displayed as quickly as possible.
• the OR objects are likely to be presented to him very quickly, thus reducing the idle times of the process.
• the OR objects are likely to be presented to him very quickly, thus reducing the idle times of the process.
• the user file is provided locally, the
• Kart_mot_intel_pct transmission of results can be very fast. User files are often smaller than supplier files, so searching can also be quick. The method therefore allows the user to benefit from this advantageous configuration.
• This display of OU objects is all the more advantageous since many users often carry out similar queries to find objects that they have already seen before.
• the partial results of each of the user and supplier files are analyzed and processed so as to produce a synthesized result.
• the complementary objects not presented during the first display, can then be added to the first. Since these are objects from supplier files, their presentation following the first results allows the user to easily identify the new objects identified.
• the second display can be produced according to another type of presentation, according to the instructions or criteria transmitted to the analysis module.
• Figures 9 and 10 illustrate the two types of search previously mentioned, namely search by object ( Figure 9) and search by previous requests ( Figure 10).
• search by object Figure 9
• Figure 10 search by previous requests
• the request is compared with each of the objects, in a conventional manner, and the objects corresponding to the criteria of the request are retained.
• the second mode is advantageously provided to optimize the search time in a user file.
• the user supplies objects to a user file, as described below, in relation to FIGS. 8, 11, 12 and 13, for each object kept in a user file, the request having served to locate this object is also retained.
• the object and its corresponding request are also linked.
• a new request rO is compared to the previous requests kept in the user file. If an identical previous query is found, the corresponding raw results, that is to say the objects associated with this previous query, are retained.
• the raw results originating from the user files are analyzed with respect to the raw results originating from the supplier files, as described previously, in relation to FIGS. 6 and 7.
• FIGS. 8, 11, 12 and 13 illustrate on the one hand the method for managing personal objects, and on the other hand examples of management interface.
• a search for example a search concerning the word “airplane” as illustrated in FIG. 11, a certain number of results are presented.
• the "Airplane 1" object comes from a user file. The user recognizes it with ease due to an attribute in the form of a personal comment. Subsequent objects come from supplier files. In order to manage the objects of his choice in order to keep them, the user selects an object of his choice from the list of results. This selection step is presented in FIGS. 8 and 12. In this last figure, the selection, for example by click of a mouse, of the object “Airplane 2” is noted.
• this selection operation generates the appearance of a management window, presented in FIG. 13.
• the attributes of the selected object are made available to the user, who can easily process them, thanks to classic commands and / or menus.
• This is the personalization step, with the attributes, in Figure 8.
• the user can modify or delete one or more existing attributes, he can create one or more new attributes.
• other options may be offered. For example, adding attributes related to a rating or preference rating (or vice versa).
• attributes are advantageously used in the analysis step, in order to establish priorities for the presentation of certain objects over others. Objects with a high rating can thus be displayed at the top of the list. The others, with lower ratings, later, in order of ratings.
• a non-display attribute can also be proposed to the user, so that a given object, which the user does not wish to see displayed, can be filtered during the analysis step and not appear in the list. results.
• Kart_mot_inteI_pct A date stamp can be proposed, in order to identify the date on which an object was processed, modified, or found. This type of data can allow sorting in chronological order during the analysis step.

Landscapes

• Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
• Databases & Information Systems (AREA)
• Theoretical Computer Science (AREA)
• Data Mining & Analysis (AREA)
• Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
• General Engineering & Computer Science (AREA)
• General Physics & Mathematics (AREA)
• Information Retrieval, Db Structures And Fs Structures Therefor (AREA)

Applications Claiming Priority (2)

Publications (1)

Family

ID=34947111

Family Applications (1)

Country Status (2)

Families Citing this family (5)

Family Cites Families (4)

• 2005
  • 2005-04-12 EP EP05742832A patent/EP1763790A1/de not_active Withdrawn
  • 2005-04-12 WO PCT/EP2005/003838 patent/WO2005114469A1/fr not_active Ceased

Non-Patent Citations (1)

Also Published As

Similar Documents

Legal Events