Computerized asset management system

Details Computerized asset management system Computerized asset management system

2000-08-22

2003-02-11

Choules, Jack (Department: 2177)

Data processing: database and file management or data structures

Database design

Data structure types

C705S027200, C707S793000

Reexamination Certificate

active

06519600

ABSTRACT:

MICROFICHE APPENDIX
A microfiche appendix, containing 3 microfiche and 207 total frames is filed herewith.
The invention concerns management of RESOURCEs, which take the form of (a) downloadable computer data and programs and (b) physical objects, which are located at multiple REPOSITORIEs, at different sites. The RESOURCEs appear to a user, at any given site, as though the RESOURCEs were actually present at the user's site.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
A database is somewhat analogous to a card catalog of a library. The card catalog cross-indexes books in several ways.
For example, an “author” card exists. This card is located in the catalog at the alphabetical position of the author's surname.
In addition, a “title” card exists, located in the alphabetical position of the book's title. Also, a “subject” card generally exists, which describes the subject of the book, and which is located in the alphabetical position of the subject, such as “pressed flower collecting,” for example. Of course, other cards can exist for a given book (for example, books having multiple authors generally have an author card for each).
In database terms, these cards represent “fields” within the database. For example, in a library, to find all of the books written by Ernest Hemingway, one looks up “Hemingway” in the card catalog. All of the library's books written by any Hemingway are identified by respective author cards. In a computer database, a similar search could be done, upon the “author” field.
Similar searches can be done on the title fields, as well as on the subject fields.
Computer databases, in general, have more fields than does the card catalog. For example, if the card catalog were contained within a computer database, there would probably exist a “date” field. To search using the “date” field, one specifies a date, or range of dates, and the database responds by listing all books having a copyright which complies with the specified date, or range.
Presently existing databases have limitations. For example, many databases require that a user undergo significant training in order to learn how to use the data base. Some databases use arcane commands which the user must memorize.
Some databases contain only that information which is owned by the database owner. Returning to the library analogy, if a public library were to computerize its card catalog, by entering all of the information contained within the card catalog into the database program, the database program would, of course, only contain the card catalog information. A user could not, for example, gain access to the card catalog of a second library, in order to locate a book not owned by the first library. The user must go to the second library.
OBJECTS OF THE INVENTION
An object of the invention is to provide a system for storing information in a manner in which retrieval is simple.
Another object of the invention is to provide a system for storing information, in which entering information, as well as retrieving the information, is self-explanatory, and requires no resort to external instructions.
Another object of the invention is to provide a system for storing information, which can communicate with other systems which store information, and make available all of the information stored by all systems.
Another object of the invention is to provide a system which allows a user to search all information contained, in multiple databases, according to key words.
Another object of the invention is to provide a system which allows a user to establish a standing search, which searches, by key words, new information, at specified intervals in the future.
SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION
In one form of the invention, physical objects are stored at multiple different locations, and a profile is maintained for each physical object. The profiles contain descriptions of the physical objects, including location, and are key-word searchable. A user is allowed to issue a query containing key words, and the profiles containing the key words are identified and presented to the user. The user may order delivery of a physical object described in the delivered profiles, whereupon a notice is issued to a transportation agent, who picks up the physical objects and delivers them to the user. The profiles need not be stored at the same location, but can be distributed, as are the physical objects.


REFERENCES:
patent: 5117354 (1992-05-01), Long et al.
patent: 5319542 (1994-06-01), King, Jr. et al.
patent: 5666493 (1997-09-01), Wojcik et al.
patent: 5694551 (1997-12-01), Doyle et al.
“Harvest User's Manual” by Darren R. Hardy & Michael F. Schwartz, Version 1.0 Oct. 1994. Last revised on Nov. 3, 1994.
“Essence: A Resource Discovery System Based on Semantic File Indexing” by Darren R. Hardy & Michael F. Schwartz—University of Colorado, Boulder. 1993 Winter USENIX -Jan. 25—29, 1993—San Diego, CA pp. 361-374.
“Harvest Effective Use of Internet Information,” The Harvest Information Discovery and Access System. No Date.
“The Harvest Information Discovery and Access System” by C. Mic Bowman, Peter B. Danzig, Darren R. Hardy, Ndi Manber & Michael F. Schwartz. 1994.
Technical Discussion of the Harvest System. No Date.
Harvest Demonstration Brokers. Feb. 1996.
Instructions for the Harvest distribution: Version 1.3. No Date.
Frequently Asked Questions (and Answers) about Harvest Version 1.4 patchlevel 2. 13 pages. Feb. 1996.
“Customized Information Extraction as A Basis for Resource Discovery,” by Darren R. Hardy and Michael F. Schwartz, Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado, Boulder. Mar. 1994.
“Debugging Autonomously Managed Distributed Systems & The Harvest Cache and Directory Replicator,” by Peter B. Danzig Computer Science Department, University of Southern California, Nov. 2, 1994.
Harvest: A Scalable, Customizable Discovery and Access System, IRTF-RD: Mic Bowman (co-PI, Transarc), Pater Danizig (co-PI, USC), Darren Hardy (PRA, U Colorado), Udi Manber (co-PI, U Arizona), Mike Schwartz (PI, U Colorado). 1994.
“Internet Resource Discovery Services,” by Katia Obraczka, Peter B. Danzig and Shih-Hao Li, University of Southern California, 8153 Computer, 26 (1993) September, No. 9, Los Alamitos, CA, US.
“The Internet Gopher: A Distributed Server Information System, ” by Mark Cahill, University of Minnesota. No Date.
“The Internet Gopher Protocol a distributed document search and retrieval protocol” Network Working Group, Request for Comments: 1436. 15 pages. Mar. 1993.
Exploring the Power of the Internet Gopher, UIUCnet V6-1, Jan. 1993.
“The Whole Internet” User's Guide & Catalog, Second Edition, by Ed Krol 384.648, 161 Kr 1994.
Internet Passport, Northwestnet's Guide To Our World Online, Mar. 1993, Fourth Edition, pp. 259-344.
“archie—An Electronic Directory Service for the Internet,” by Alan Emtage, McGill University, Montreal, Canaca, Peter Deutsch, McGill University, Montreal, Canada, USENIX—Winter 1992.
“Distributed Indexing A Scalable Mechanism for Distributed Information Retrieval,” by Peter B. Danzig, Jongsuk Ahn, John Noll, Katia Obraczka, Computer Science Department, University of Southern California,, Los Angeles, California. ACM SIGIR Conference 1991, pp. 220-229.
“Internet Resource Discovery at the University of Colorado,” by Michael F. Schwartz, Department of Computer Science, University of Colorado, Boulder Colorado, Oct. 1992.
“Research Problems for Scalable Internet Resource Discovery,” by C. Mic Bowman, Peter B. Danzig, Michael F. Schwartz, University of Colorado at Boulder, Technical Report CU-CS-643-93, Mar. 1993.
“Fields of Files,” by Ruth Halpern, LAN Technology, Sep. 1991, vol. 7, No. 9, pp. 48-62.
“Test Drive—Inside the Document Den,” by Ruth Halpern, Lan Magazine, Dec. 1992, vol. 7, No. 12, pp. 170-178.
Automating Document Managewment, Office Administration and Automation, vol. XLVI, No. 4, Apr. 1985, pp. 51-86.
“A Network Under Control,” by Ed Perratore, Dec. 17, 1991, PC Magazine, pp. 287-330.
“Evolution of the Internet Gopher,” by Mark P. McCahill & Farhad X. Anklesaria, J.UCS vol. 1, Iss

Affiliated with

Also associated with

Rating

Computerized asset management system does not yet have a rating. At this time, there are no reviews or comments for this patent.

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

Rate now

Comments { 0 }

Profile ID: LFUS-PAI-O-3146663