Appeal 2007-1505
Application 10/279,481
The second issue before us is whether Appellants have shown that the
Examiner erred because the combination of Costello and Sarkar does not
teach or suggest validating the schema manipulations as claimed in claims 1
and 16. 2
The third issue before us is whether Appellants have shown that the
Examiner erred because the combination of Su and Clewis does not teach the
claim 11 feature of “determining whether a first set of XML documents
contains a second set of XML documents.”
FINDINGS OF FACT
Costello is an article discussing the importance of evolving XML
schemas. Costello mentions that evolution may happen in many ways,
adding, deleting or restructuring the schema. See paragraph under heading
“1. Design for Evolvability.” The Article explores several XML schemas
which have open content, a schema that allows content in addition to
elements defined in the schema. See abstract and paragraph under heading
“7. What is Open Content?” The article discusses several ways in which a
XML schema can be open using the “<any/>” element, the “content=
‘open’/>” element, or writing a new schema derived from an existing
schema. See paragraphs under the headings “9. Current Implementation of
Open Content,” “11. A Better Approach to Expressing Open Content,” and
“12. Schema Evolution using Refinement (Derive by Extension).” The
article does not discuss validation of the schema manipulation operations.
2 We recognize that Appellant has additional contentions with regard to the
Examiner’s rejection of independent claims 1 and 16. However, the issues
6
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013