Liaison interface

Details Liaison interface Liaison interface

1999-09-29

2003-04-08

Kincaid, Kristine (Department: 2174)

Computer graphics processing and selective visual display system

Display driving control circuitry

Controlling the condition of display elements

C345S215000, C345S215000, C345S215000, C345S215000

Reexamination Certificate

active

06545690

ABSTRACT:

FIELD OF THE INVENTION
The invention is directed toward a technology for providing a liaison interface between a user and an existing user interface, and more particularly to such a liaison interface where the existing user interface normally requires an extensive amount of direct user interaction, and where the liaison interface isolates the user from the existing user interface by taking the place of the user in the extensive direct interaction with the existing user interface in order to reduce the amount of direct interaction required of the user.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Large systems often include monitoring systems that permit one or more users to monitor the performance of the system in general, and to specifically monitor the state of one or more parameters of the large system. In some instances, the manner in which the monitoring system delivers information to the user can be a burden.
An example of the large system discussed above is a wireless communication network. Lucent Technologies Inc. has developed a monitoring system that a user can use to change parameters of the large system as well as to extract data about the large system. This monitoring system can generate the TIpdunix (TI) interface, the Status Display Page (SDP) interface and/or the AUTOPLEX Recent Change & Verification Database (APXRCV) interface. These interfaces can be used individually. But typically, information extracted from one of the interfaces is used to make a decision to use a second one of the interfaces in one way or another. To use an interface, a user must start a discrete process. In a windows-based environment, each interface session has its own window.
These discrete or non-integrated interfaces to the monitoring systems pose problems for the user. Each interface has its own set of commands as well as formats for returning information to the user. These command sets and display formats are extensive. This burdens the user's memory. Moreover, the SDP interface returns information in a manner that requires the user to interpret a combination of the foreground and background colors, as well as whether the associated text is blinking or not, in a particular region of the screen in order to determine the state of a system component of a large system.
Based upon the information extracted from a first interface, the user must make a decision about whether it is appropriate to use a second interface and if so, the user must appropriately form the command to be submitted. Often, the first interface is used merely to verify that the large system is operating correctly. The user must inspect the data returned by the first interface to confirm that it is consistent with normal operation of the large system. If there is some discrepancy, it must be recognized by the user. Then, the user must determine the problem that is indicated by the discrepancy. Then, the user must take appropriate action, typically via one of the other interfaces.
While the user has the responsibility of confirming via one of the interfaces that the operation of the large system is normal, the user is essentially a prisoner to that interface. The user must continually confirm that the operation of the large system is normal by repeatedly extracting data from the large system. If the user fails to recognize a discrepancy in the data that is returned, then the user will have failed to recognize that there is a problem for which action must be taken.
In another instance, the user might use one of the interfaces to change a parameter in the large system. To confirm that the parameter change has taken effect, the user typically has to use a second interface. But there is typically a delay between the requested change of parameter and the time at which it takes effect in the large system. To confirm that the change has taken effect, the user must repeatedly extract information from the large system via the second interface. Again, the user becomes a prisoner of the second interface until the user recognizes something in the data returned by the second interface that indicates the desired change has taken place.
Again, the TI, SDP and APXRCV interfaces each require a great deal of direct user interaction. An example of this is depicted in the unified modeling diagram of FIG.
1
.
FIG. 1
depicts interactions between a user
101
and a monitoring system
304
(to be discussed in more detail below concerning FIG.
3
). Communication from the user originates from a line
102
, while communications from the monitoring system
304
originate from a line
104
. The monitoring system
304
can generate the TI, SDP and/or APXRCV interfaces discussed above.
In the unified modeling diagram of
FIG. 1
, a user desires the result of executing an inventory command via the TI interface. To do so, the user might have to manipulate a field in the APX database in order to enable the use of an inventory command of the TI interface. First, the user must initiate an interface session with the APXRCV interface.
Then, the user must make a backup copy of the APXRCV database for the cell in consideration. Making the backup copy represents the first action requested by the user and it is requested via the APXRCV interface, i.e., the first interface. This is a prudent step to prevent unwanted changes to the database. Then, the user must request data from a particular field within the database. This represents the first data request by the user. Again, it is requested via the first interface. This also requires the user to remember the relevant command and its arguments. Then, the user must wait to find out if the data request is successful or if it failed.
If the first data request is successful, then the user must evaluate the data returned from the field in the database and determine whether it is necessary to modify that data so that the later TI command will be enabled. If the content of the field in the database must be altered, then the user must remember the relevant command and its arguments as well as construct and submit the command. In other words, the user must request a second action, again, via the APXRCV interface. Once the particular field in the database stores the desired value, the user must initiate a TI session. Then, the user must determine whether the TI session has been successfully established. If not, then the user must restore the APXRCV database to its original values. Otherwise, the user must remember the desired TI command and its arguments. In other words, the user must request a third action, but this time it is requested via a second interface (the TI interface). Then the user should terminate the TI session. Then the user should restore the previous values of the APXRCV database, i.e., request a fourth action, again, via the first interface.
Again,
FIG. 1
depicts the interaction between the user
101
and monitoring system
304
in the example discussed above. At item
105
, after the user has initiated the APXRCV interface session, the user must remember the format of the desired command. At item
106
, the user constructs and submits this command, i.e., requests the first action via the first interface. It is to be recalled that this corresponds to backing up the APXRCV database for the cell under consideration.
At item
107
, the user must remember the format of the command needed to extract the value of a field within the particular database. At item
108
, the user constructs and then submits the desired command, i.e., requests the first data via the first interface. At item
109
, the APXRCV interface returns the first data. At item
110
, the user must analyze the first data and decide whether or not that field in the database must be modified.
Assuming that the field in the database must be modified, at item
111
, the user must remember the format for the desired command. At item
112
, the user must construct and submit the desired command, i.e., the user must request the second action via the first interface. Then, at item
114
, the user must determine if the change to the APXRCV database field wa

Affiliated with

Also associated with

Rating

Liaison interface does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.

If you have personal experience with Liaison interface, we encourage you to share that experience with our LandOfFree.com community. Your opinion is very important and Liaison interface will most certainly appreciate the feedback.

Rate now

Comments { 0 }

Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3062339