Mixed Signals
Any sufficiently advanced information is indistinguishable from noise
Friday 7 August 2009, 12:22 PM
Microsoft patents XML word processing documents
The patent, filed in December 2004 and granted on August 4 2009, specifies that this is done using an XML Schema Document (XSD), which contains more information about the document's formatting, and also covers systems that can open the document without using the original word processing software.
Both XML and XML Schema are long-established open standards, designed to do exactly this, among many other functions.
The patent also specifies that the document can contain formatting information such as line, paragraph and page breaks, font styles and sizes, and other standard components of text documents.
Within the patent, Microsoft has included a list of over a hundred references to books, articles, patents and other software that bear on XML usage in word processing.
On the face of it, the patent would appear to cover all usage of XML and XSDs in word processing document, which would effectively leave all other modern word processors - and other software that used their documents - liable to licensing by the company.
(thanks to H-Online)
PreviousComments on this post
I can't quite decide what they've patented here. A quick skim through suggests it's the hinting bit of the system that is the real purpose.
So if you want to import the text from a document quickly as a programmer, there a hints in the document and schema saying that you only need to pull out the T tags to get that text.
By the same token if you're exporting here are the vital bits to say get a table into word.
Difficult to say for sure as I'm not installing quicktime to read the document complete with diagrams.
But how can you patent hinting?
If I write a word processor that uses XML and Microsoft's lawyers come after me, what's my lawyer going to say?
You shouldn't worry too much as the examiner has pointed out some prior art already.
However I think the claim is for something like this:
(bold)(text)hello(/text)(/bold) (text)world(/text) is covered but
(text)(bold)hello(/bold)world(/text) would not be.
i.e. its the act of having the text in xml text elements with no intervening elements.
convert () to less than or greater than as necessary since the comment system ate my originals.
Mind you the whole thing looks like an attempt to patent a schema more than anything else.
How can you patent using XML is a better question.
As far as I can see this is a patent describes using XML to define a document created using a word processor. It seems that much of the patent is related to providing document definition as well as content as a single file. I dare say there will be much prior art found to blow this one out of the water. Just because the patent has been granted doesn't mean that it holds water. The US patent system is a mess and this seems to be a classic example, after all XML is based on SGML which is defined as 'the international standard used to give meaning to the structure and the content of electronic documentation of any kind'. I would say 'any kind' covers word processor documents.
There seems enough prior art in the patent itself, much added at the suggestion of the examiner (who presumably rejected the initial 2002 submission).
A most peculiar thing.
Just because the patent has been granted doesn't mean anything, the whole patent looks rotten to me, full of a lot of references to a standards and common practices dressed up as an invention; very suspect. It doesn't seem to describe anything in detail and I doubt will stand up to close scrutiny.
ah "Open" XML. Typical Microsoft.
Whether it stands up to scrutiny depends on how deep your pockets are when Microsoft's lawyers call.
Its yet another idiotic patent from an idiotic government office. I'm sorry my tax dollars are supporting such lame actions.
Every application ever written that attempts to put two XML elements in the same node "infringes" on this totally stupid patent.
We'll get a good read on the veracity of Microsoft's new Open Source policy (support for Linux in their HyperVisor) when we see if they attempt to hammer on Sun and OpenOffice.org. Also on Altova and dozens of other companies selling XML\XSD related tools. All of which can be considered XML\XSD editors or word processors.
They will try to patent the English language next, or < >, ( ), #, =, { } , and anything else used in writing code. It has been reported that since they have no original ideas of their own, they are trying to capitalize on others.
In other words, business as usual.
I think Tezzer has made an excellent point. The leopard does not change its spots. Just another attempt to make money from other peoples' efforts and investments. Shame on Microsoft.
To add a comment, fill out the form below
