Method for mapping, translating, and dynamically reconciling data between disparate computer platforms

• US 5,666,553 A
• Filed: 07/22/1994
• Issued: 09/09/1997
• Est. Priority Date: 04/10/1992
• Status: Expired due to Term

• Current Assignee: Intellisync Corporation (Nokia Corporation)
• Original Assignee: Puma Technology Inc.
• Inventors: Crozier, Keith
• Primary Examiner(s): Herndon, Heather R.
• Assistant Examiner(s): Burwell, Joseph R.
• Application Number:
  US08/279,201
• Time in Patent Office: 1,145 Days
• Field of Search: 395/161, 395/144, 395/153, 395/200, 395/600, 395/803, 395/347, 395/619
• US Class Current: 715/229
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 15/0208 for combination with other devices having a different main function, e.g. watches, pens
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 15/0266 for time management, e.g. calendars, diaries
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 16/258 Data format conversion from or to a database
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/087 Inventory or stock management, e.g. order filling, procurement or balancing against orders
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 10/10 Office automation; Time management
• CPC Class Codes: G06Q 20/203 Inventory monitoring
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99943 Generating database or data structure, e.g. via user interface
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99945 Object-oriented database structure processing
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99948 Application of database or data structure, e.g. distributed, multimedia, or image
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99952 Coherency, e.g. same view to multiple users
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99953 Recoverability
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 707/99954 Version management
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 715/963 Calendar or scheduling
• CPC Class Codes: Y10S 715/971 Cooperative decision support systems for group of users

Abstract

Traditionally, it has been difficult to share data among diverse computer applications and platforms because of underlying differences in data formats. Although the meaning or purpose of the data may be similar or identical (for example, two appointments entered using separate computer applications), the differences in data formats required by the various computer applications and platforms renders such sharing difficult. A method is disclosed for the translation of dissimilarly-formatted data between disparate computer applications and platforms. The method also provides for the dynamic reconciliation of conflicts in the data (for example, two appointments scheduled at the same time) based on both the content of the data and on specific preferences indicated by the user of the translation facility. First, the data is translated to a common format based on the user-specified mapping of data fields (identifying handheld and desktop fields to be translated) and considering the characteristics of the handheld or desktop computer application. Then, if the specific data item (such as an appointment, telephone book entry, or memo entry) already exists on the desktop computer application or platform, the user is optionally notified of the conflict and given the opportunity to replace the existing data, ignore the incoming data, or modify the incoming data. The criteria for determining the existence of conflicts is disclosed for updating schedule information and keyed databases.

Claims

1. A method for a user of a computer to interactively reconcile records of a first and a second database, wherein the record structures of the first and second database are different, the method comprising:

translating records of at least the first database to assist in comparing records of the first and second databases;

choosing corresponding records, one from the first database and one from the second database, based on a comparison of the content of at least one selected field from each record;

comparing the content of at least one additional field from each record to detect differences in content between the records;

using the detected differences in content to decide whether a conflict exists between records;

displaying information representative of the detected differences in content; and

allowing the user to decide between alternatives for resolving the conflict.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein the alternatives for resolving the conflict comprise replacing the content of the one additional field in one of the databases with the content of the one additional field in the other of the databases.

3. The method of claim 1 wherein the alternatives for resolving the conflict comprise allowing the user to edit the content of the one additional field in at least one of the databases.

4. The method of claim 1 wherein records of both the first and second database are translated to a common record structure prior to choosing and comparing actions.

5. The method of claim 1 wherein the at least one selected field from each record is a key field.

6. The method of claim 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 wherein the first and second databases are calendar databases, and the records comprise records representing appointments or events.

7. The method of claim 6 wherein the at least one selected field used for choosing records is other than a date or time field.

8. The method of claim 1 wherein the translation comprises mapping of fields of the first database to fields of the second database.

9. The method of claim 8 wherein the mapping is specified by the user.