Appeal 2007-1651
Application 09/791,152
(King, col. 41, line 7), which is equivalent to the spacing proximity policy of
the claimed invention.”
Thus, the issue before us is whether King teaches or makes obvious
determining whether a page falls within a proximity policy and reformatting
the page to fall within the proximity policy wherein the proximity policy
defines a minimal spacing between respective links within a page.
FINDINGS OF FACT
1. King teaches a system to create documents where the same
content elements can be put into different document formats.
Col. 6, ll. 20-36.
2. King teaches that the data may contain indications of the
amount of space to be allocated to elements. Col. 30, ll. 26-
39, figures 28A-28D, and col. 32 ll. 30-55.
3. King teaches that when the content elements of the document
do not fit within the space of the template, the content size is
adjusted to fit the space in the template. Col. 40, ll. 43-54.
4. The adjustment of content is achieved through a scale factor,
which may be different for different types of content, e.g. the
scale factor for text may be different than for photos. Col.
40, ll. 55-67.
5. One of the scale factors is the “white space scale factor” but
no definition of this scaling factor is identified. Col. 41, l. 7.
4
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013