CA1306069C - Method of assigning retention and deletion criteria to electronic documents stored in an interactive information handling system - Google Patents
Method of assigning retention and deletion criteria to electronic documents stored in an interactive information handling systemInfo
- Publication number
- CA1306069C CA1306069C CA000578288A CA578288A CA1306069C CA 1306069 C CA1306069 C CA 1306069C CA 000578288 A CA000578288 A CA 000578288A CA 578288 A CA578288 A CA 578288A CA 1306069 C CA1306069 C CA 1306069C
- Authority
- CA
- Canada
- Prior art keywords
- document
- criteria
- ownership
- label
- end user
- Prior art date
- Legal status (The legal status is an assumption and is not a legal conclusion. Google has not performed a legal analysis and makes no representation as to the accuracy of the status listed.)
- Expired - Fee Related
Links
Classifications
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F16/00—Information retrieval; Database structures therefor; File system structures therefor
- G06F16/90—Details of database functions independent of the retrieved data types
- G06F16/93—Document management systems
-
- G—PHYSICS
- G06—COMPUTING; CALCULATING OR COUNTING
- G06F—ELECTRIC DIGITAL DATA PROCESSING
- G06F2216/00—Indexing scheme relating to additional aspects of information retrieval not explicitly covered by G06F16/00 and subgroups
- G06F2216/09—Obsolescence
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/912—Applications of a database
- Y10S707/913—Multimedia
- Y10S707/915—Image
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/99931—Database or file accessing
- Y10S707/99939—Privileged access
-
- Y—GENERAL TAGGING OF NEW TECHNOLOGICAL DEVELOPMENTS; GENERAL TAGGING OF CROSS-SECTIONAL TECHNOLOGIES SPANNING OVER SEVERAL SECTIONS OF THE IPC; TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC
- Y10S—TECHNICAL SUBJECTS COVERED BY FORMER USPC CROSS-REFERENCE ART COLLECTIONS [XRACs] AND DIGESTS
- Y10S707/00—Data processing: database and file management or data structures
- Y10S707/99951—File or database maintenance
- Y10S707/99952—Coherency, e.g. same view to multiple users
- Y10S707/99953—Recoverability
Abstract
ABSTRACT
A method for automatically completing the entry of the retention and deletion criteria employed by an interactive information handl-ing system to manage the automatic retention and deletion of a relatively large number of electronic documents that are stored in said system by a plurality of end users each of which has an inter-active terminal connected to the system that includes a keyboard and a display device; The method provides a screen image on the display device in response to the end user advising the system that he wants to assign retention and deletion information to an electronic document that he wants the system to store. The screen image prompts the end user for a set of required criteria and allows the interactive entry of one or more criteria by the end user directly. The remaining criteria that are not entered directly by the end user are entered automatically based on a logical analysis by said system involving the identity of the criteria that was entered directly and pre-established information stored in said system.
In the preferred embodiment the criteria include a document label, an ownership label, a document expiration date and an ownership expiration date. Information stored in the system involved in the automatic entry process includes allowable document and ownership labels personalized for each end user and allowable expiration dates or ranges for each label. Also stored in the system are rules that allow a logical analysis to select a default criteria and to verify any information that was entered directly by the end user.
Documents mab be automatically retained and deleted by process-ing the expiration date criteria associated with each document relative to a current date according to various strategies.
A method for automatically completing the entry of the retention and deletion criteria employed by an interactive information handl-ing system to manage the automatic retention and deletion of a relatively large number of electronic documents that are stored in said system by a plurality of end users each of which has an inter-active terminal connected to the system that includes a keyboard and a display device; The method provides a screen image on the display device in response to the end user advising the system that he wants to assign retention and deletion information to an electronic document that he wants the system to store. The screen image prompts the end user for a set of required criteria and allows the interactive entry of one or more criteria by the end user directly. The remaining criteria that are not entered directly by the end user are entered automatically based on a logical analysis by said system involving the identity of the criteria that was entered directly and pre-established information stored in said system.
In the preferred embodiment the criteria include a document label, an ownership label, a document expiration date and an ownership expiration date. Information stored in the system involved in the automatic entry process includes allowable document and ownership labels personalized for each end user and allowable expiration dates or ranges for each label. Also stored in the system are rules that allow a logical analysis to select a default criteria and to verify any information that was entered directly by the end user.
Documents mab be automatically retained and deleted by process-ing the expiration date criteria associated with each document relative to a current date according to various strategies.
Description
~ 3~;069 MET~OD ~F ASSIGNING RETE~rION AND DR~ETION CRITFgl~ TO RLECT~ONIC
DO~UMF.NTS STORE~ IN AN INTER~CTIVE INFORM~TION }~NDLIN~ SYSTeH
This invention relates in general to methods for classifying electronic documents in an interacti.ve informa-tion handling system and in particular -to a method of classifying documents which insures -that descriptors established for managing the retention and deletion of stored documents are correctly applied -to the document when the document is filed in the system Cross-referenced Applications Canadian applicatlon serial no. 581,527, -Ei.led Oc-tober 27, 19~8, entitled "~ Method for Managing the Retention of Elec-tronic Documents in an Interactive Information Handling System" by M.G. MacPhail, is directed to a method of automatically managing the retention and deletion of stored documents in which -the criteria for determining which documents are retained and which documents are is deleted is based on first and second expiration dates which reflect differen-t consideratlons and which are controlled by different entities.
Back~round Art:
The prior art has disclosed various interactive information handling systems which store elec-tronic documents. These systems vary in complexity and sophistication from the very simple personal computer employed in the home for writing letters to the very large main frame data processing sys-tems in which thousands of users nodes interact with each other and with a centralized library or file of information. ~n example of a sophisticated system that is currently in use by several large governmental agencies and private corporations is the system referred to as PROFS that is marketed by the IBM Corporation. These types of system store and manage millions of documents ranging from one page memos and massages to multi-page xeports that might involve several printed volumes. In many of -these systems, the need for hard copy no longer exists, so the only copy of the information is the originally generated electronic copy.
The management and control of the paper flow in any large enterprise, be it a governmental agency or a private corporation, requires a set of procedures which define how various types of .A~T987-014 ~3~ 9 ccmmunications or documents are to be handled. rrhis is a llecessity in both manually implemented systems which deal in nothing but hard copy as well as electronically implemented systems that deal only with electronic copies.
It is generally recognized by both types or systems, that there are t~c basic document control strategies that must be enforced in order to have an effective and efficient systemO The first is that documents that are no longer needecl should be ~eleted from the system as soon as possible and the second is that a document that is required should be maintained as long as it is neecled by the docu-ment ot~ner or the enterprise. a It is obvious that in implem~nt:ing these two basic concepts it is not alt~ays possible to obtain an agreement, much less a consen-sus, on such items as to who makes the decision to keep or delete a lS document, does this decision apply to all documents types or does it change with the type of document, can there be exceptions and changes in the criteria, whQ determines the time period for document types, etc.
m e prior art systems that involve a larse number of users who create electronic documents that are stored in the system at a logically centralized location, do generally impose a number OI
- structured rorm~tting constraints on the manner by which documents are identified in the system. In most system,s, some type or manual document classification system is estabiished, either on a forr.~l basis or a de facto basis. A bank might use a functional business classi~ication for documents. For example a customer's 70an folder might include a "loan application", a "credit history", a "payment history" etc. mese various documents have different retention re-quirements and there is generally no provision made to pennit any deviations from the established retention criteria. In prior art system, a search is performed on a specific term contained in a plurality of documents and documents are deleted based thereon. The term may have a different meaning within each of the douc~ents.
Thus, this forr. of document management may result in the deletiGn OI
document t~hich should be retained or the omission ot documents which do not contain the term and should be deleted.
A batch type of approach to document retention where the date to delete the document is controlled by the enterprise creates a problem when the date has to be changed. If the date that ~he document is to be deleted is shortened, there is undoubtedly scme persons who are relying on the fact that the document is to be available up to the previously established date. Ho~ does the system administrator evaluate whether ~lese docurnents can ~e destroyed. If ~.
AT9-87-01~
~3~
the documents are deleted there :Ls likely to be some direct adverse consequence to those persons who were relying on the document for their work. A more serious long term consequence however results when documents are destroyed enrly , ln that there is a loss oE integrtty of the system which soon results in users operating their own backup documen-t storage system which defeats the many advantages oE a centralized system.
It is therefore important in electronic document storage sys-tem to provide the user with as much flexibility as possible :in as many arefls as possible. The problem of providing flexibility -to the user however almost always adds to the complexity of the process and requires -the user to obtain and retain an understanding of all -the various options available and the nuances of their clifferences. It is extremely important to have the data that is used to manage the reten-tion and deletion of the documents, entered correctly into the s~stem. The data entry process for the end user of the system must therefore be slmple to use, yet permit a more sophisticated user to take advantage of the more advance features. The data entry process must also be fail safe to insure that only valid descriptors are entered into the system.
The present invention is directed to an improved method for use in an interactive information handling system in which the the data entry process for the descriptors that are used in the retention and deletion of documents is simple, flexible, and fail safe, and therefore avoids many of the problems that occur with the prior art document storage systems.
Summary of the Invention-The method of the present invention is advantageously employed :Ln the arrangement disclosed in the above referenced Canadian application no. 581,527. That arrangement involves a recognition of the respective document retention needs of the document owners and the document retention criteria of the enterprise that functions as the central administration of the system, by es-tablishing a dual label for each document that ls to be stored in the system. The firs-t label is ~eferred to as the Document Label (DL) and functions, for example, to identify -the business use classification of the document. The second label is referred to as the Ownership Label ~OL) and functions to identify a document classification assigned by the owner, which in most situations is the author.
A separate expiration date is associated with each of the two labels. The ownership expira-tion date is set by the owner to indicate -the length of time -tha-t he desires ownership o-f the document. Ownership implies the authority and responsibility for the document during -the ownership period. A System Administrator (SA) for example establishes the range of expiration dates for each user for each of the document labels.
'"~
AI~987-014 6(~6~
Each document filed in the system has associated with it the lahel and expiration date criteria that are employed to automat-ically manage the retention and deletion of documents from the system.
When a document is to be filed by the system, the retention and deletion selection criteria must be entered into the syst~n and stored in the system at the sarne tirne as the document. me informa-tion is entered into the system interactively by the end user. A
series of prompts is presented on the screen of a display device by the system in response to the user selecting an option presented on a menu screen. The amount of data entered in response to the prompt can very depending on the user and other considerations. Valid document labels are preferably preestablished by the System Admin-istrator (SA). Valid ownership labels for each end user are also preestablished by the end user and the SA. A profile is established for each end user which includes several different tables. ~le table functions io provide a default document label descriptor which is selected in accordance wit'n an input ownership label descriptor that was entered manually. If the end user did not enter a document label, the met'nod provides the preestablished default. If a docuT~nt label is entered ranually b~ the end user, the correctness OI the docurent label is verified by the method. Other tables provide default ownership labels for user entered document labels; default c~nership ex~iration dates for ownership labels, and default docu-m~ent dates for docu,nent labels. Associated with each table is a set ol detault rules which cover the various perrnutations tnat might occur with the input entry data and dictate a consistent result for the sane input data each time.
m e end user ~ay override a default document ex~iration date t.ith a valid alternate date. The document owner can establish a range OI allowable expiration dates ior each ownership label which can be entered autornatically when the ownership label is entered.
m e end user rnay also override a default document o~nership date with a valid alternate date. m e docuTTIent owner can establish a range of allowable ownership dates for each ownership label which can be entered automatically when the ownership label is entered.
Documents are automatically retained and deleted by processing the expiration date criteria associ-ated with each docurnent relative to a current date according to the rnethod of the cross-referenced application.
It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide an improved rnethod for storing electronic documents.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an irnprov-ed rnethod tor entering criteria into an electronic docurnent storage system that is used in rnanaging the retention of the stored elec-tronic documents.
. ~T987-014 ~3~ )6~
A further object of the present invention is to provide an improved method for automatically entering retention and deletion criteria for stored electronic documents.
A s-till further object of the present invention iis to provide an improved method to automatically enter and verify criteria that are employed by an electronic document storage system to manage the retention and deletion of documents in the system.
A still further object of the present invention is to insure the integrity and validity of retention and deletion criteria that is entered into an electronic document storage system.
Object and advantages other than those mentloned above will become apparent from the following description when read in con-nection with the drawing Brief Description of the Drawing Fig. 1 is a block diagram of an information handling system in which the method of the present invention may be advantageously employed.
Fig. 2 is a block diagram of one of the interactive terminals employed by a user in tbe system of Fig. 1.
Figs. 3a and 3b illustrate an overview of the document genera-tion and storage process.
Figs. 4a, 4b and 4c illustrate screens for the main action menu, the sub-action menu for a documsnt, and the select action for document menu, referred to in Fig. 3b.
Fig. 5 illustrates the screen that is presented the end user at the time a document is to be filed in the system.
Fig. 6 illustrates the screen that is presented to a designated end used when a list of allowable document labels is requested.
3Q Fig. 7 illustrates the screen that is presented to a designated end user when a list of allowable ownership labels is requested.
Fig. 8 illustrates the ownership label section of a user's profile.
Fig. 9 illustrates the document label section of a user's profile.
Fig. 10 illustrates the ownership expiration date table for a user profile.
Fig. 11 illustrates the document expiration date table for a user profile.
Figs. 12a and 12b illustrate tables of expiration date calcula-tion rules for a user profile.
Figs 13a through 13d illustrate tables of default rules for the document retention criteria. rules Figs. 14a through 14d is a flow chart illustrating the various steps of the method of the present inven-tion.
-- S - ~ .
~3~ 9 Description of the Preferred Embodiment:
Fig. 1 illustrates an information handling system comprising a network of interactive type terminals or workstations oE the type shown in detail in Fig. 2. As illustrated, the network includes a plurality of terminals which are interconnected with each other and to a host central processing unit 23. As shown in Fig. 1 host 23 in turn is connected via communication link 24 to a second host pro-cessing unit 25, which also connects to another network 26 of interactive workstations. Functionally, the system operates to allow each terminal to communicate with the host and to one or more other terminals using established communication protocols, so that the various serially connected communication links are transparent to the users. A user at one terminal can generate a document such as a letter and send that letter to the addressee at a designated node on the network. The user can then store the document in the system at some logically central system location. Each user of the system has the theoretical capability of retrieving that document at a later time. Such systems are well known in the art, and are currently in extensive commercial use. Since the general organiza-tion and operations of such systems is well known, only those details that are necessary for an understanding of the document ' storage method of the present invention will be described. It should therefore be assumed in the following description, that each workstation on the network has a system node address and a "post office" address, and that to simplify the description, there is only one individual assigned to each node on the network. It should further be assumed that conventional communication services are provided by the system, such as directory listings of individual users or owners etc. It may also be assumed that the system shown in Fig. 1 processes information as various types of data objects such as text data objects, graphic data objects, and calendar data objects etc Fig. 2 illustrates the functional components of one of the interactive type data processing terminals shown in ~ig.. 1. The terminal comprises a processing unit 31 which includes a micropro-cessor block 32, a semiconductor memory 33, and a control block 34 which functions to control input/output operations in addition to the interaction between the micro processor block 32 and the memory unit 33.
The terminal further includes a group of conventional peripheral units including a display device 36, a keyboard 37, a printer 38, a disk storage unit 39, and a modem 40. Since the details of the above described functional blocks form no part of the present invention and can be found in the prior art, only a brief functional , - AT987-014 ~lL30~Q69 description of each block is set forth, along with a description of their interactions, sufficient to provide a person of ordinary skill in the art with a basis of understanding applicants' improved electronic document storage method.
Processing unit 31 corresponds for e~ample to the "system unit"
of a personal computer system such as the IBM XT* IBM AT*or an IBM
PS/2 *system. Unit 31 is provided with an operating syste~ program which may be one of the many versions of DOS (Disk Operating System) which is normàlly employed to run the systems. The operating system program is stored in memory 33 along with one or more application programs that the user has selected to run. Depending on the capacity of memory 33 and the size of the application programs, portions of these programs, as needed, may be transferred to memory 33 from the disk storage unit 39 which may include, for example, a 30 megabyte hard disk drive and a diskette drive. The basic func-tion of the disk storage unit is to store programs and data that are employed by the system and which may readily be transferred to the ` memory unit 33 when needed. The function of the diskette drive is - to provide a removable storage function for enterin~ programs and data into the system, and a vehicle for storing data in a form that ~ is readily transportable for use on othar terminals or systems;
: `` Display device 36 and keyboard 37 together provide for the interactive nature of the terminal, in that in normal operation, the interpretation that the system gives to a specific keystroke by the operator depends, in substantially all situations, on what is being displayed to the operator at that point in time.
In some situations, the operator, by entering commands into the system, causes the system to perform a certain function. In other situations, the system requests the entry of certain data, generally by displaying a prompt type of menu/message screen. The depth of the interaction between the operator and the system varies by the type of operating system and the application program, but is a necessary characteristic of terminals on which the method of the present invention may be employed.
The terminal shown in Fig. 2 further includes a printer 38, which functions to provide hard copy output of data developed or stored in the system at some central location. Lastly, the modem 40 functions to transfer data from the terminal of Fi~. Z to a host system through one or more communication links which may be a commercial type link or a dedicated communication link.
Fig. 3a represents an overview of the system from the standpoint of the major interactive steps involved in storinK a document that has been created by an End User (EU). Block 50 represents the EU.
Blocks 51 and 52 represent programs stored at the terminal while block 53 represents local disk storage. Blocks 54 and 55 represent - ~ -` *TradR MaLk - IBM Corp. ~ 7;~
. AT987-014 ~3~ 9 the library server Eunction located at the host and is the central depository for stored system documents. The program represented by block 51 is referred to as the Dialogue Manager application and functions to provide the necessary menus and prompts to obtain information from the user. It is essentially the interface to the user from the terminal. The program represented by block 52 is referred to as the requester application and functions to build requests and send them to the library server. The function of the library server is to validate/set labels and expiration dates and to file the document. The flow chart of Fig 3b shows the major steps of first creating a document; second selecting tha sub-action menu in order to set the document descriptors; thlrdly setting the actual descriptors in the set document descriptor menu; and lastly filing the document.
The main action menu is shown in Fig. 4a. As shown, the menu illustrates three separate actions that the EU can designate. The screen cursor is represented by an X in Fig. 4a and as illustrated is adjacent the "Create a Document" action. The action is selected in the normal manner by positioning the cursor adjacent the line on the menu and hitting the "enter" key. The system responds with a series of prompts which allows the user to create a document. Por ~' purposes of this description it can be assumed that the document is sent to another EU on the system and the author now wants to store the document.
In order to store the document, descriptors must be assigned which assists in controlling the retention of the document up to a specified time and automatic deletion of the document after that time, in accordance with some predetermined strategy. The sub-action menu shown in Fig 4b. includes an option to "SET DESCRIPTORS" which 3~ is selected to enter the criteria that will be used to manage the retention and automatic deletion of documents from the system. When this option is selected the screen shown in Fig. 5 is displayed to the EU. The end user responds to the various prompts displayed in Fig. 5 by entering a name for the document label and a name for the ownership label. It should be assumed for the moment that the respective names have been preestablished. The expiration dates for the document and the ownership may be provided in a number of different ways.
As indicated on the screen of Fig. 5, a list of allowable values can be obtained by placing the cursor under the appropriate field and pressing a predesignated key such as the "HELP" key. The allowable values which have been preestablished then appear in a "window" or on a separate screen which permits the user to copy or just select the choice by positioning the cursor and pressing the "ENTER" key. FiB. 6 illustrates the screen that is provided when - - 8 ~ .
~T987-014 ~ 3~069 the end user places the cursor under the field "DCCUMENT LABEL" in Fig. 5 an presses the HELP key. Fig. 7 illustrates the screen that is provided when the end user pLIces the cursor under the field "OWNERSEIIP LABEL" in Fig. 5 and presses the HELP key. The set of allowable ownership labels that are displayed in Fig. 7 are unique to the document label BUDGE~'. A difrerent set of allowable ownership labels would generally be displayed ~or a different document label.
It should be noted that the end user has the fleYlbility to enter in all four criteria manually, or the end user can obtain -10 assistance in selecting an ownership label or a document label. As will be explained in detail later, all data that is entered direc~ly into the system by the end user is verified by the system to insure the integrity of this data. The entry of the criteria data automatically based on one or more criteria that have been entered manually will now be described.
Each end user in the system has a profile that is developed by the end user and the system administrator and which is stored in the system. The profiie has the following sections:
1. An ot~nership lclbel section, illustrated in Fig. 8.
2. A document label section, illustrated in Fig. 9.
3. An ownership expiration date table illustrated in Fig.
10.
DO~UMF.NTS STORE~ IN AN INTER~CTIVE INFORM~TION }~NDLIN~ SYSTeH
This invention relates in general to methods for classifying electronic documents in an interacti.ve informa-tion handling system and in particular -to a method of classifying documents which insures -that descriptors established for managing the retention and deletion of stored documents are correctly applied -to the document when the document is filed in the system Cross-referenced Applications Canadian applicatlon serial no. 581,527, -Ei.led Oc-tober 27, 19~8, entitled "~ Method for Managing the Retention of Elec-tronic Documents in an Interactive Information Handling System" by M.G. MacPhail, is directed to a method of automatically managing the retention and deletion of stored documents in which -the criteria for determining which documents are retained and which documents are is deleted is based on first and second expiration dates which reflect differen-t consideratlons and which are controlled by different entities.
Back~round Art:
The prior art has disclosed various interactive information handling systems which store elec-tronic documents. These systems vary in complexity and sophistication from the very simple personal computer employed in the home for writing letters to the very large main frame data processing sys-tems in which thousands of users nodes interact with each other and with a centralized library or file of information. ~n example of a sophisticated system that is currently in use by several large governmental agencies and private corporations is the system referred to as PROFS that is marketed by the IBM Corporation. These types of system store and manage millions of documents ranging from one page memos and massages to multi-page xeports that might involve several printed volumes. In many of -these systems, the need for hard copy no longer exists, so the only copy of the information is the originally generated electronic copy.
The management and control of the paper flow in any large enterprise, be it a governmental agency or a private corporation, requires a set of procedures which define how various types of .A~T987-014 ~3~ 9 ccmmunications or documents are to be handled. rrhis is a llecessity in both manually implemented systems which deal in nothing but hard copy as well as electronically implemented systems that deal only with electronic copies.
It is generally recognized by both types or systems, that there are t~c basic document control strategies that must be enforced in order to have an effective and efficient systemO The first is that documents that are no longer needecl should be ~eleted from the system as soon as possible and the second is that a document that is required should be maintained as long as it is neecled by the docu-ment ot~ner or the enterprise. a It is obvious that in implem~nt:ing these two basic concepts it is not alt~ays possible to obtain an agreement, much less a consen-sus, on such items as to who makes the decision to keep or delete a lS document, does this decision apply to all documents types or does it change with the type of document, can there be exceptions and changes in the criteria, whQ determines the time period for document types, etc.
m e prior art systems that involve a larse number of users who create electronic documents that are stored in the system at a logically centralized location, do generally impose a number OI
- structured rorm~tting constraints on the manner by which documents are identified in the system. In most system,s, some type or manual document classification system is estabiished, either on a forr.~l basis or a de facto basis. A bank might use a functional business classi~ication for documents. For example a customer's 70an folder might include a "loan application", a "credit history", a "payment history" etc. mese various documents have different retention re-quirements and there is generally no provision made to pennit any deviations from the established retention criteria. In prior art system, a search is performed on a specific term contained in a plurality of documents and documents are deleted based thereon. The term may have a different meaning within each of the douc~ents.
Thus, this forr. of document management may result in the deletiGn OI
document t~hich should be retained or the omission ot documents which do not contain the term and should be deleted.
A batch type of approach to document retention where the date to delete the document is controlled by the enterprise creates a problem when the date has to be changed. If the date that ~he document is to be deleted is shortened, there is undoubtedly scme persons who are relying on the fact that the document is to be available up to the previously established date. Ho~ does the system administrator evaluate whether ~lese docurnents can ~e destroyed. If ~.
AT9-87-01~
~3~
the documents are deleted there :Ls likely to be some direct adverse consequence to those persons who were relying on the document for their work. A more serious long term consequence however results when documents are destroyed enrly , ln that there is a loss oE integrtty of the system which soon results in users operating their own backup documen-t storage system which defeats the many advantages oE a centralized system.
It is therefore important in electronic document storage sys-tem to provide the user with as much flexibility as possible :in as many arefls as possible. The problem of providing flexibility -to the user however almost always adds to the complexity of the process and requires -the user to obtain and retain an understanding of all -the various options available and the nuances of their clifferences. It is extremely important to have the data that is used to manage the reten-tion and deletion of the documents, entered correctly into the s~stem. The data entry process for the end user of the system must therefore be slmple to use, yet permit a more sophisticated user to take advantage of the more advance features. The data entry process must also be fail safe to insure that only valid descriptors are entered into the system.
The present invention is directed to an improved method for use in an interactive information handling system in which the the data entry process for the descriptors that are used in the retention and deletion of documents is simple, flexible, and fail safe, and therefore avoids many of the problems that occur with the prior art document storage systems.
Summary of the Invention-The method of the present invention is advantageously employed :Ln the arrangement disclosed in the above referenced Canadian application no. 581,527. That arrangement involves a recognition of the respective document retention needs of the document owners and the document retention criteria of the enterprise that functions as the central administration of the system, by es-tablishing a dual label for each document that ls to be stored in the system. The firs-t label is ~eferred to as the Document Label (DL) and functions, for example, to identify -the business use classification of the document. The second label is referred to as the Ownership Label ~OL) and functions to identify a document classification assigned by the owner, which in most situations is the author.
A separate expiration date is associated with each of the two labels. The ownership expira-tion date is set by the owner to indicate -the length of time -tha-t he desires ownership o-f the document. Ownership implies the authority and responsibility for the document during -the ownership period. A System Administrator (SA) for example establishes the range of expiration dates for each user for each of the document labels.
'"~
AI~987-014 6(~6~
Each document filed in the system has associated with it the lahel and expiration date criteria that are employed to automat-ically manage the retention and deletion of documents from the system.
When a document is to be filed by the system, the retention and deletion selection criteria must be entered into the syst~n and stored in the system at the sarne tirne as the document. me informa-tion is entered into the system interactively by the end user. A
series of prompts is presented on the screen of a display device by the system in response to the user selecting an option presented on a menu screen. The amount of data entered in response to the prompt can very depending on the user and other considerations. Valid document labels are preferably preestablished by the System Admin-istrator (SA). Valid ownership labels for each end user are also preestablished by the end user and the SA. A profile is established for each end user which includes several different tables. ~le table functions io provide a default document label descriptor which is selected in accordance wit'n an input ownership label descriptor that was entered manually. If the end user did not enter a document label, the met'nod provides the preestablished default. If a docuT~nt label is entered ranually b~ the end user, the correctness OI the docurent label is verified by the method. Other tables provide default ownership labels for user entered document labels; default c~nership ex~iration dates for ownership labels, and default docu-m~ent dates for docu,nent labels. Associated with each table is a set ol detault rules which cover the various perrnutations tnat might occur with the input entry data and dictate a consistent result for the sane input data each time.
m e end user ~ay override a default document ex~iration date t.ith a valid alternate date. The document owner can establish a range OI allowable expiration dates ior each ownership label which can be entered autornatically when the ownership label is entered.
m e end user rnay also override a default document o~nership date with a valid alternate date. m e docuTTIent owner can establish a range of allowable ownership dates for each ownership label which can be entered automatically when the ownership label is entered.
Documents are automatically retained and deleted by processing the expiration date criteria associ-ated with each docurnent relative to a current date according to the rnethod of the cross-referenced application.
It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide an improved rnethod for storing electronic documents.
Another object of the present invention is to provide an irnprov-ed rnethod tor entering criteria into an electronic docurnent storage system that is used in rnanaging the retention of the stored elec-tronic documents.
. ~T987-014 ~3~ )6~
A further object of the present invention is to provide an improved method for automatically entering retention and deletion criteria for stored electronic documents.
A s-till further object of the present invention iis to provide an improved method to automatically enter and verify criteria that are employed by an electronic document storage system to manage the retention and deletion of documents in the system.
A still further object of the present invention is to insure the integrity and validity of retention and deletion criteria that is entered into an electronic document storage system.
Object and advantages other than those mentloned above will become apparent from the following description when read in con-nection with the drawing Brief Description of the Drawing Fig. 1 is a block diagram of an information handling system in which the method of the present invention may be advantageously employed.
Fig. 2 is a block diagram of one of the interactive terminals employed by a user in tbe system of Fig. 1.
Figs. 3a and 3b illustrate an overview of the document genera-tion and storage process.
Figs. 4a, 4b and 4c illustrate screens for the main action menu, the sub-action menu for a documsnt, and the select action for document menu, referred to in Fig. 3b.
Fig. 5 illustrates the screen that is presented the end user at the time a document is to be filed in the system.
Fig. 6 illustrates the screen that is presented to a designated end used when a list of allowable document labels is requested.
3Q Fig. 7 illustrates the screen that is presented to a designated end user when a list of allowable ownership labels is requested.
Fig. 8 illustrates the ownership label section of a user's profile.
Fig. 9 illustrates the document label section of a user's profile.
Fig. 10 illustrates the ownership expiration date table for a user profile.
Fig. 11 illustrates the document expiration date table for a user profile.
Figs. 12a and 12b illustrate tables of expiration date calcula-tion rules for a user profile.
Figs 13a through 13d illustrate tables of default rules for the document retention criteria. rules Figs. 14a through 14d is a flow chart illustrating the various steps of the method of the present inven-tion.
-- S - ~ .
~3~ 9 Description of the Preferred Embodiment:
Fig. 1 illustrates an information handling system comprising a network of interactive type terminals or workstations oE the type shown in detail in Fig. 2. As illustrated, the network includes a plurality of terminals which are interconnected with each other and to a host central processing unit 23. As shown in Fig. 1 host 23 in turn is connected via communication link 24 to a second host pro-cessing unit 25, which also connects to another network 26 of interactive workstations. Functionally, the system operates to allow each terminal to communicate with the host and to one or more other terminals using established communication protocols, so that the various serially connected communication links are transparent to the users. A user at one terminal can generate a document such as a letter and send that letter to the addressee at a designated node on the network. The user can then store the document in the system at some logically central system location. Each user of the system has the theoretical capability of retrieving that document at a later time. Such systems are well known in the art, and are currently in extensive commercial use. Since the general organiza-tion and operations of such systems is well known, only those details that are necessary for an understanding of the document ' storage method of the present invention will be described. It should therefore be assumed in the following description, that each workstation on the network has a system node address and a "post office" address, and that to simplify the description, there is only one individual assigned to each node on the network. It should further be assumed that conventional communication services are provided by the system, such as directory listings of individual users or owners etc. It may also be assumed that the system shown in Fig. 1 processes information as various types of data objects such as text data objects, graphic data objects, and calendar data objects etc Fig. 2 illustrates the functional components of one of the interactive type data processing terminals shown in ~ig.. 1. The terminal comprises a processing unit 31 which includes a micropro-cessor block 32, a semiconductor memory 33, and a control block 34 which functions to control input/output operations in addition to the interaction between the micro processor block 32 and the memory unit 33.
The terminal further includes a group of conventional peripheral units including a display device 36, a keyboard 37, a printer 38, a disk storage unit 39, and a modem 40. Since the details of the above described functional blocks form no part of the present invention and can be found in the prior art, only a brief functional , - AT987-014 ~lL30~Q69 description of each block is set forth, along with a description of their interactions, sufficient to provide a person of ordinary skill in the art with a basis of understanding applicants' improved electronic document storage method.
Processing unit 31 corresponds for e~ample to the "system unit"
of a personal computer system such as the IBM XT* IBM AT*or an IBM
PS/2 *system. Unit 31 is provided with an operating syste~ program which may be one of the many versions of DOS (Disk Operating System) which is normàlly employed to run the systems. The operating system program is stored in memory 33 along with one or more application programs that the user has selected to run. Depending on the capacity of memory 33 and the size of the application programs, portions of these programs, as needed, may be transferred to memory 33 from the disk storage unit 39 which may include, for example, a 30 megabyte hard disk drive and a diskette drive. The basic func-tion of the disk storage unit is to store programs and data that are employed by the system and which may readily be transferred to the ` memory unit 33 when needed. The function of the diskette drive is - to provide a removable storage function for enterin~ programs and data into the system, and a vehicle for storing data in a form that ~ is readily transportable for use on othar terminals or systems;
: `` Display device 36 and keyboard 37 together provide for the interactive nature of the terminal, in that in normal operation, the interpretation that the system gives to a specific keystroke by the operator depends, in substantially all situations, on what is being displayed to the operator at that point in time.
In some situations, the operator, by entering commands into the system, causes the system to perform a certain function. In other situations, the system requests the entry of certain data, generally by displaying a prompt type of menu/message screen. The depth of the interaction between the operator and the system varies by the type of operating system and the application program, but is a necessary characteristic of terminals on which the method of the present invention may be employed.
The terminal shown in Fig. 2 further includes a printer 38, which functions to provide hard copy output of data developed or stored in the system at some central location. Lastly, the modem 40 functions to transfer data from the terminal of Fi~. Z to a host system through one or more communication links which may be a commercial type link or a dedicated communication link.
Fig. 3a represents an overview of the system from the standpoint of the major interactive steps involved in storinK a document that has been created by an End User (EU). Block 50 represents the EU.
Blocks 51 and 52 represent programs stored at the terminal while block 53 represents local disk storage. Blocks 54 and 55 represent - ~ -` *TradR MaLk - IBM Corp. ~ 7;~
. AT987-014 ~3~ 9 the library server Eunction located at the host and is the central depository for stored system documents. The program represented by block 51 is referred to as the Dialogue Manager application and functions to provide the necessary menus and prompts to obtain information from the user. It is essentially the interface to the user from the terminal. The program represented by block 52 is referred to as the requester application and functions to build requests and send them to the library server. The function of the library server is to validate/set labels and expiration dates and to file the document. The flow chart of Fig 3b shows the major steps of first creating a document; second selecting tha sub-action menu in order to set the document descriptors; thlrdly setting the actual descriptors in the set document descriptor menu; and lastly filing the document.
The main action menu is shown in Fig. 4a. As shown, the menu illustrates three separate actions that the EU can designate. The screen cursor is represented by an X in Fig. 4a and as illustrated is adjacent the "Create a Document" action. The action is selected in the normal manner by positioning the cursor adjacent the line on the menu and hitting the "enter" key. The system responds with a series of prompts which allows the user to create a document. Por ~' purposes of this description it can be assumed that the document is sent to another EU on the system and the author now wants to store the document.
In order to store the document, descriptors must be assigned which assists in controlling the retention of the document up to a specified time and automatic deletion of the document after that time, in accordance with some predetermined strategy. The sub-action menu shown in Fig 4b. includes an option to "SET DESCRIPTORS" which 3~ is selected to enter the criteria that will be used to manage the retention and automatic deletion of documents from the system. When this option is selected the screen shown in Fig. 5 is displayed to the EU. The end user responds to the various prompts displayed in Fig. 5 by entering a name for the document label and a name for the ownership label. It should be assumed for the moment that the respective names have been preestablished. The expiration dates for the document and the ownership may be provided in a number of different ways.
As indicated on the screen of Fig. 5, a list of allowable values can be obtained by placing the cursor under the appropriate field and pressing a predesignated key such as the "HELP" key. The allowable values which have been preestablished then appear in a "window" or on a separate screen which permits the user to copy or just select the choice by positioning the cursor and pressing the "ENTER" key. FiB. 6 illustrates the screen that is provided when - - 8 ~ .
~T987-014 ~ 3~069 the end user places the cursor under the field "DCCUMENT LABEL" in Fig. 5 an presses the HELP key. Fig. 7 illustrates the screen that is provided when the end user pLIces the cursor under the field "OWNERSEIIP LABEL" in Fig. 5 and presses the HELP key. The set of allowable ownership labels that are displayed in Fig. 7 are unique to the document label BUDGE~'. A difrerent set of allowable ownership labels would generally be displayed ~or a different document label.
It should be noted that the end user has the fleYlbility to enter in all four criteria manually, or the end user can obtain -10 assistance in selecting an ownership label or a document label. As will be explained in detail later, all data that is entered direc~ly into the system by the end user is verified by the system to insure the integrity of this data. The entry of the criteria data automatically based on one or more criteria that have been entered manually will now be described.
Each end user in the system has a profile that is developed by the end user and the system administrator and which is stored in the system. The profiie has the following sections:
1. An ot~nership lclbel section, illustrated in Fig. 8.
2. A document label section, illustrated in Fig. 9.
3. An ownership expiration date table illustrated in Fig.
10.
4. A document e~piration date table illustrated in Fig. 11.
5. A table oî rules for calculating eA~piration dates, illustrated in Figs. 12a and 12b.
I~e function of each of these sections and their inter-relationships to the other sections and to the process of automatic data entry and verification Oc manually entered data ~lill noti be described.
The ownership label section sho~n in Fig. ~ comprises four columns: INPU~ LABEL; OUTPUT LABEL; DESCRI~ION; and DEFAULT
DCX~NT LABEL.
The INPUT LABEL column lists a set of possible input labels that, a) the end user t~uld possibly enter directly and b) labels approved for use by another end user or used by another system that are assigned to doc~nents that are sent to -this end user that will be stored in his system.
The ourrPUrr L~BE~ column includes the set of approved o~nership labels that are actually assigned to documents as they c~re stored.
m e functional relationship of the two columns is to automatically convert an unapproved ot~nership label to an approved ownership label. The last tt~ entries cover the situation of miscellcmeous ~T987-014 ~3(~il[)6~
labels OTHER and NONE. The OTI ~ entry is used when a label is entered ~ut no match is found. The NONE entry is used when no label is entered.
The DESCRIPTION column is self explanatory and is used only in the process of creating the profile and as an aid to understanding the labels when a profiie is reviewed.
'~le DEFAULT DOCUMENT L~BEL column lists a set of approved document labels for each of the approved ownership l~bels listed in column t~o. The function of the default document label is to permit -10 the automatic entry of a document label into the set doc~nent descriptors m~enu shown in Fi~. 5 in those situations where the end user has elected for some reason not to enter the data directly.
The doc~nent label section shown in Fig. 9 ccmprises four columns: INPUT ~BEL; OUTPUT LABEL; DESCRIP'rION; and D3FAULT
CWNERSE~P i~BEL, The INPUT LABEL coiumn lists a set of possible input labels that, a) the end user ~ould possibly enter directly and b) labels approved for use by another end user or used by another system that are assigned to documents that are sent to this end user that will be stored in the end user's syste7n.
The OUTPUT LABEL column includes the set of approved document L-~els thai are actually assigned to documents as they are stored.
e ~lctional relationship of the ~o columns is to autc~atically convert an unapproved dcc~ment label to an approved document label.
'~he ldst t~Jo entries in the ~ur L~BYL column cover the situation OI a miscellaneous label OTHER nd the situation where ~he end user did note enter an ownership label.
m e ~ESCRIPTIC~ column is self explanatory and is used only ~1 the prccess or creating the pro~ile and as an aid to understanding the labels when a pro~ile is reviewed.
The DEF~ULT O~NEE~SHIP L~BEL column lists a set of approved ownership labels for each of the approved output docu~Rnt labels -listed in column two. The function of the defaul-t document label is to permit the automatic entry of an ownership label ilrto ~le set documRnt descriptors mRnu shown in Fig. 5 in those situations where the end user has elected ~or some reason not to enter the data ~;rectly.
me ownership expiration date s@ction as shown in Yig. 10 comprises five columns: the OUl'PUT OhNERSElIP LABEL col~n; the i~IN~UM column;the ~ C~ ~ column; the P~SSlBL3 VALUES column;
and the DE~'A~LT column. r~lis section has two functions, ncimely to verify that cm ownership expiration date that was entered directly by the end user is a permlssible date value, and to provide a derault date in the event that data is not entered directly.
.
~30Ei~
The OUTPUT 0WNERSHIP LABEL column contains a set or list of approvsd ownership labels.
The MINIMUM column contains an entry which indicates a minimum time period that a document containin~ the label in column l must be owned by the end user. The implication is that ownership may be maintained at least until the end of the period specified.
The MAXIMUM column contains an entry which indicates a maximum time period that ownership may be maintained. The implication is that after the stated period, this end user does not have responsibility for the document nor control over it.
The PERMISSIBLE VALUES column contains an entry which indicate the values that may be entsred. The implication is that time periods must be expressed in predetermined units, i.e. days, not hours, between the minimu~ and maximum values set forth in column 2 and 3.
The DEFAU~T column contains an entry for each label in column l which indicates the time period that is entered automatically into the set descriptors menu of Fig. 5 when that data is not entered directly by the end user. The time period is converted into an expiration date by the system using the current date as the starting time for the calculation.
The MINI~nM, MAXIMUM and PERMISSIBLE VALUES columns are employed `' to verify an ownership expiration date that has been entered directly by the end user. The DEFAULT column is employed in the process of automatic data entry when the end user has elected not to enter the expiration date directly. verify The document expiration date section as shown in Eio. ll com-prises five columns: the OUTPUT DOCUMENT LABEL column; the MINIMUM
column;the MAXIMUM column; the PERMISSIBLE VALUES column; and the DEFAULT column. This section has two functions, namely to verify that a document expiration date that was entered directly by the end user is a permissible date value, and to provide a default date in the event that data is not entered directly.
The OUTPUT DOCUMENT LABEL column contains a set or list of approved document labels.
The MINIMUM column contains an entry which indicates a minimum time period that a document containing the label in column l must be maintained by the system. The implication is that the document will be maintained at least until the end of the period specified.
The MAXIMUM column contains an entry which indicates a maximum time period that the document may be maintained by the system. The implication is that after the stated period, the document may be deleted from the system. nor control over it.
. AT987-014 ~3~i069 The PERMISSIBLE ~ALUES column contains an entry for each label which indicates the values that may be entered. The implication is that time periods must be expressed in predetermined units, i.e.
days, not hours, between the minimum and maximum values se~ forth in column 2 and 3.
The DEFAULT column contains an entry for each label in column 1 which indicates the time period that is entered automatically into the set descriptors menu of Fig. 5 when that data is not entered directly by the end user. The time period is converted into an expiration date by the system using the current date as the starting time for the calculation.
The MINIMUM, MAXIMUM and PERMISSIBLE VALUES columns are employ-ed to verify a document expiration date that has been entered directly by the end user. The DEFAULT column is employed in the process of automatic data entry when the end user has elected not to enter the document expiration date directly.
The TABLE OF RULES FOR EXPIRATION DATE CALCULATIONS as shown in Figs. 12 a and 12b comprise two columns: the LABEL column and the RULE column. The labels listed in column 1 of Fig 12a are approved ownership labels a~d correspond to the set oE labels listed in column 1 of Fig 10. The Rules are established by the enterprise in accordance with the document retention strategy and reflect the understanding that the document expiration date and the ownership expiration date will generally have a quantifiable relationship for any given document type. The Rule tables of Figs. 12a and 12b are used to verify that the two expiration dates assigned to the document either directly by the end user or automatically by the system meet the predetermined relationship that has been established by the system.
Figs 13a through 13d illustrate the rules for applying defaults for each of the four criteria that is entered into the set descriptors menu of Fig. 5. Fig. 13a sets forth the rules for applying a default ownership label and comprises four columns: the INPUT OWNERSHIP LABEL MATCHES PROFILE column; the INPUT DOCUMENT
LABEL MATCHES PROFILE column; the DEFAULT OWNERSHIP LABEL EXISTS
column; and the RESULT column. The Rules summarized in the chart are as follows:
1. If the input ownership label entered directly by the end user is a valid input ownership label as listed on the profile of the end user then enter the corresponding output ownership label.
~3~
2. If the input ownership label entered is not a valid input ownership label, then the document is not filed. The end user is given a chance to resubmit the re~est.
3. If under case 2, the file is rejected.
~. If either the ownership label and document label that were entered directly by the end user is invalid, the file is rejected.
The end user is given a chance to resubrnit the file. Tne invalid values are highlighted.
Rules similar to rules l- ~ listed above can be articulated from - 10 the other default rules tables illustrated in Figs. 13b, 13c and 13d.
Fig. 14 is an extensive flow chart iliustrating the various steps that occur in the rnethod o the present invention to cause the automatic entry and verification of retention and deletion criteria data for each document that is stored in the system. The flow chart is in sufficient detail to permit a person skilled in ',he art to understand the sequence of steps tha~ are perrorme~ for the differ-ent scenarios that the end user ~uld encounter. A cetailed descrip-tion of the operation setting for~h ~he steps of the flow chart is therefore considered unnecessa~ ror an understanding or the invention.
The following is a list of pseuàocoae statements which may ~e used by a programmer to implement the present invention in a typical ~lectronic document storage system.
File Doc~ment with Classirication Infor~nation:
Called by:
This routine is called rro.n a routine ~lat interfaces wi~h the End User (E~U) or System ~m~nistrator (SA) to provide d ile docu ~ ~t with a specified classirication, e.g. business classificatlon.
Input:
User Profile(s) Document derinition including, Document content Document discriptors including, Docu ~It Label {DL) ~nership Label (OL) E~piration perio~ values(s) :1 3~6~
PROCESS
If an OL matches an input value in the user profile (l~
Then, Set the OL for this document to the corresponding OL
output value from the user profile (2) Endif (Check OL) If the DL matches an input value in the user profile (3) Then, Set the DL for this document to the corresponding DL
output value from the user profile (4) io Endif (Check DL ) If the Ownership Expiration Date is specified Then, set the OED as specified Endif (OED is specified) If the Document Expiration Date (DED) is specified Then, set the DED specified Endif (DED is specified) If the OL is set and the DL is not set (5) Then, set the DL for this document to the corresponding default DL for this OL
Endif (set DL from OL) If the DL is set and the OL is not set (6) ' Then, set the OL for this document to the corresponding default OL for this DL
Endif (set DL from OL) If the OL is set and the OED is not set (7) Then, set the OED for this document to the corresponding default OED for this OL
Endif (set OED from OL) If the DL is set and the DED is not set (8) Then, set the DED for this document to the corresponding default DED for this DL
Endif (set DED from OL) If the OL is set and the DED is not set (9) Then, set the DED for this document to the corresponding default DED for this OL
Endif (set DED from OL) If the OL is invalid (l0) Then, setup to redisplay the input area with the original values setup to highlight the invalid OL
Endif (Invalid OL) If the DL is invalid (ll) Then, setup to redisplay the input area with the original values setup to highlight the invalid DL
Endif (Inva:Lid DL) . ~:
~L3~
If the OED is invalid (12) Then, setup to redisplay the input area with the original values setup to highlight the invalid OED
Endif (Invalid OED) If the DED is invalid (13) Then, setup to radisplay the input: area with the original values setup to highlight the invalid DED
Endif (Invalid DED) The following comments relate to the numbers at the end of the statements;
(1) The user profile table for the OL can include a "catch all"
entry which means "use this entry if the label is specified, but it doesn't match any value explicitly entered into the table." A "null"
entry can be specified which means "use this entry if no label is specified".
(2) The output OL can be the same or different value from the input OL.
(3) The DL is processed like the OL. See (1).
(4) The output DL can be the same or different value from the input DL.
' (5) The DL can be defaulted by knowing the OL.
I~e function of each of these sections and their inter-relationships to the other sections and to the process of automatic data entry and verification Oc manually entered data ~lill noti be described.
The ownership label section sho~n in Fig. ~ comprises four columns: INPU~ LABEL; OUTPUT LABEL; DESCRI~ION; and DEFAULT
DCX~NT LABEL.
The INPUT LABEL column lists a set of possible input labels that, a) the end user t~uld possibly enter directly and b) labels approved for use by another end user or used by another system that are assigned to doc~nents that are sent to -this end user that will be stored in his system.
The ourrPUrr L~BE~ column includes the set of approved o~nership labels that are actually assigned to documents as they c~re stored.
m e functional relationship of the two columns is to automatically convert an unapproved ot~nership label to an approved ownership label. The last tt~ entries cover the situation of miscellcmeous ~T987-014 ~3(~il[)6~
labels OTHER and NONE. The OTI ~ entry is used when a label is entered ~ut no match is found. The NONE entry is used when no label is entered.
The DESCRIPTION column is self explanatory and is used only in the process of creating the profile and as an aid to understanding the labels when a profiie is reviewed.
'~le DEFAULT DOCUMENT L~BEL column lists a set of approved document labels for each of the approved ownership l~bels listed in column t~o. The function of the default document label is to permit -10 the automatic entry of a document label into the set doc~nent descriptors m~enu shown in Fi~. 5 in those situations where the end user has elected for some reason not to enter the data directly.
The doc~nent label section shown in Fig. 9 ccmprises four columns: INPUT ~BEL; OUTPUT LABEL; DESCRIP'rION; and D3FAULT
CWNERSE~P i~BEL, The INPUT LABEL coiumn lists a set of possible input labels that, a) the end user ~ould possibly enter directly and b) labels approved for use by another end user or used by another system that are assigned to documents that are sent to this end user that will be stored in the end user's syste7n.
The OUTPUT LABEL column includes the set of approved document L-~els thai are actually assigned to documents as they are stored.
e ~lctional relationship of the ~o columns is to autc~atically convert an unapproved dcc~ment label to an approved document label.
'~he ldst t~Jo entries in the ~ur L~BYL column cover the situation OI a miscellaneous label OTHER nd the situation where ~he end user did note enter an ownership label.
m e ~ESCRIPTIC~ column is self explanatory and is used only ~1 the prccess or creating the pro~ile and as an aid to understanding the labels when a pro~ile is reviewed.
The DEF~ULT O~NEE~SHIP L~BEL column lists a set of approved ownership labels for each of the approved output docu~Rnt labels -listed in column two. The function of the defaul-t document label is to permit the automatic entry of an ownership label ilrto ~le set documRnt descriptors mRnu shown in Fig. 5 in those situations where the end user has elected ~or some reason not to enter the data ~;rectly.
me ownership expiration date s@ction as shown in Yig. 10 comprises five columns: the OUl'PUT OhNERSElIP LABEL col~n; the i~IN~UM column;the ~ C~ ~ column; the P~SSlBL3 VALUES column;
and the DE~'A~LT column. r~lis section has two functions, ncimely to verify that cm ownership expiration date that was entered directly by the end user is a permlssible date value, and to provide a derault date in the event that data is not entered directly.
.
~30Ei~
The OUTPUT 0WNERSHIP LABEL column contains a set or list of approvsd ownership labels.
The MINIMUM column contains an entry which indicates a minimum time period that a document containin~ the label in column l must be owned by the end user. The implication is that ownership may be maintained at least until the end of the period specified.
The MAXIMUM column contains an entry which indicates a maximum time period that ownership may be maintained. The implication is that after the stated period, this end user does not have responsibility for the document nor control over it.
The PERMISSIBLE VALUES column contains an entry which indicate the values that may be entsred. The implication is that time periods must be expressed in predetermined units, i.e. days, not hours, between the minimu~ and maximum values set forth in column 2 and 3.
The DEFAU~T column contains an entry for each label in column l which indicates the time period that is entered automatically into the set descriptors menu of Fig. 5 when that data is not entered directly by the end user. The time period is converted into an expiration date by the system using the current date as the starting time for the calculation.
The MINI~nM, MAXIMUM and PERMISSIBLE VALUES columns are employed `' to verify an ownership expiration date that has been entered directly by the end user. The DEFAULT column is employed in the process of automatic data entry when the end user has elected not to enter the expiration date directly. verify The document expiration date section as shown in Eio. ll com-prises five columns: the OUTPUT DOCUMENT LABEL column; the MINIMUM
column;the MAXIMUM column; the PERMISSIBLE VALUES column; and the DEFAULT column. This section has two functions, namely to verify that a document expiration date that was entered directly by the end user is a permissible date value, and to provide a default date in the event that data is not entered directly.
The OUTPUT DOCUMENT LABEL column contains a set or list of approved document labels.
The MINIMUM column contains an entry which indicates a minimum time period that a document containing the label in column l must be maintained by the system. The implication is that the document will be maintained at least until the end of the period specified.
The MAXIMUM column contains an entry which indicates a maximum time period that the document may be maintained by the system. The implication is that after the stated period, the document may be deleted from the system. nor control over it.
. AT987-014 ~3~i069 The PERMISSIBLE ~ALUES column contains an entry for each label which indicates the values that may be entered. The implication is that time periods must be expressed in predetermined units, i.e.
days, not hours, between the minimum and maximum values se~ forth in column 2 and 3.
The DEFAULT column contains an entry for each label in column 1 which indicates the time period that is entered automatically into the set descriptors menu of Fig. 5 when that data is not entered directly by the end user. The time period is converted into an expiration date by the system using the current date as the starting time for the calculation.
The MINIMUM, MAXIMUM and PERMISSIBLE VALUES columns are employ-ed to verify a document expiration date that has been entered directly by the end user. The DEFAULT column is employed in the process of automatic data entry when the end user has elected not to enter the document expiration date directly.
The TABLE OF RULES FOR EXPIRATION DATE CALCULATIONS as shown in Figs. 12 a and 12b comprise two columns: the LABEL column and the RULE column. The labels listed in column 1 of Fig 12a are approved ownership labels a~d correspond to the set oE labels listed in column 1 of Fig 10. The Rules are established by the enterprise in accordance with the document retention strategy and reflect the understanding that the document expiration date and the ownership expiration date will generally have a quantifiable relationship for any given document type. The Rule tables of Figs. 12a and 12b are used to verify that the two expiration dates assigned to the document either directly by the end user or automatically by the system meet the predetermined relationship that has been established by the system.
Figs 13a through 13d illustrate the rules for applying defaults for each of the four criteria that is entered into the set descriptors menu of Fig. 5. Fig. 13a sets forth the rules for applying a default ownership label and comprises four columns: the INPUT OWNERSHIP LABEL MATCHES PROFILE column; the INPUT DOCUMENT
LABEL MATCHES PROFILE column; the DEFAULT OWNERSHIP LABEL EXISTS
column; and the RESULT column. The Rules summarized in the chart are as follows:
1. If the input ownership label entered directly by the end user is a valid input ownership label as listed on the profile of the end user then enter the corresponding output ownership label.
~3~
2. If the input ownership label entered is not a valid input ownership label, then the document is not filed. The end user is given a chance to resubmit the re~est.
3. If under case 2, the file is rejected.
~. If either the ownership label and document label that were entered directly by the end user is invalid, the file is rejected.
The end user is given a chance to resubrnit the file. Tne invalid values are highlighted.
Rules similar to rules l- ~ listed above can be articulated from - 10 the other default rules tables illustrated in Figs. 13b, 13c and 13d.
Fig. 14 is an extensive flow chart iliustrating the various steps that occur in the rnethod o the present invention to cause the automatic entry and verification of retention and deletion criteria data for each document that is stored in the system. The flow chart is in sufficient detail to permit a person skilled in ',he art to understand the sequence of steps tha~ are perrorme~ for the differ-ent scenarios that the end user ~uld encounter. A cetailed descrip-tion of the operation setting for~h ~he steps of the flow chart is therefore considered unnecessa~ ror an understanding or the invention.
The following is a list of pseuàocoae statements which may ~e used by a programmer to implement the present invention in a typical ~lectronic document storage system.
File Doc~ment with Classirication Infor~nation:
Called by:
This routine is called rro.n a routine ~lat interfaces wi~h the End User (E~U) or System ~m~nistrator (SA) to provide d ile docu ~ ~t with a specified classirication, e.g. business classificatlon.
Input:
User Profile(s) Document derinition including, Document content Document discriptors including, Docu ~It Label {DL) ~nership Label (OL) E~piration perio~ values(s) :1 3~6~
PROCESS
If an OL matches an input value in the user profile (l~
Then, Set the OL for this document to the corresponding OL
output value from the user profile (2) Endif (Check OL) If the DL matches an input value in the user profile (3) Then, Set the DL for this document to the corresponding DL
output value from the user profile (4) io Endif (Check DL ) If the Ownership Expiration Date is specified Then, set the OED as specified Endif (OED is specified) If the Document Expiration Date (DED) is specified Then, set the DED specified Endif (DED is specified) If the OL is set and the DL is not set (5) Then, set the DL for this document to the corresponding default DL for this OL
Endif (set DL from OL) If the DL is set and the OL is not set (6) ' Then, set the OL for this document to the corresponding default OL for this DL
Endif (set DL from OL) If the OL is set and the OED is not set (7) Then, set the OED for this document to the corresponding default OED for this OL
Endif (set OED from OL) If the DL is set and the DED is not set (8) Then, set the DED for this document to the corresponding default DED for this DL
Endif (set DED from OL) If the OL is set and the DED is not set (9) Then, set the DED for this document to the corresponding default DED for this OL
Endif (set DED from OL) If the OL is invalid (l0) Then, setup to redisplay the input area with the original values setup to highlight the invalid OL
Endif (Invalid OL) If the DL is invalid (ll) Then, setup to redisplay the input area with the original values setup to highlight the invalid DL
Endif (Inva:Lid DL) . ~:
~L3~
If the OED is invalid (12) Then, setup to redisplay the input area with the original values setup to highlight the invalid OED
Endif (Invalid OED) If the DED is invalid (13) Then, setup to radisplay the input: area with the original values setup to highlight the invalid DED
Endif (Invalid DED) The following comments relate to the numbers at the end of the statements;
(1) The user profile table for the OL can include a "catch all"
entry which means "use this entry if the label is specified, but it doesn't match any value explicitly entered into the table." A "null"
entry can be specified which means "use this entry if no label is specified".
(2) The output OL can be the same or different value from the input OL.
(3) The DL is processed like the OL. See (1).
(4) The output DL can be the same or different value from the input DL.
' (5) The DL can be defaulted by knowing the OL.
(6) The OL can be defaulted by knowing the DL.
(7) The OED can be defaulted by knowing the OL.
(8) The DED can be defaulted by knowing the DL.
(9) The DED can be defaulted by knowing the OL.
(10) If the table is set up so some values are invalid then the user must enter a valid OL.
~11) If the table is set up so some values are invalid then the user must enter a valid DL.
(12) ~llowable OEDs depend upon the OL. The DED may be required to have a defined relationship to the OED.
(13) Allowable DEDs depend upon the DL. The DED may be required to have a defined relationship to the OED.
The output of the process is:
A filed document with appropriately set labels and expiration dates, or A rejected file operation.
, . AT987-014 ~a3~
While applicant has disclosed and illustrated a preferred embodiment of the improved methodt it will be obvious to those persons skilled in the art of electronic document storage, that changes and modifications may be made without departing from the spirit of the invention or the scope of the appended claims.
. - 16 -
~11) If the table is set up so some values are invalid then the user must enter a valid DL.
(12) ~llowable OEDs depend upon the OL. The DED may be required to have a defined relationship to the OED.
(13) Allowable DEDs depend upon the DL. The DED may be required to have a defined relationship to the OED.
The output of the process is:
A filed document with appropriately set labels and expiration dates, or A rejected file operation.
, . AT987-014 ~a3~
While applicant has disclosed and illustrated a preferred embodiment of the improved methodt it will be obvious to those persons skilled in the art of electronic document storage, that changes and modifications may be made without departing from the spirit of the invention or the scope of the appended claims.
. - 16 -
Claims (11)
1. A method for automatically providing the retention and deletion criteria employed by an interactive information handling system to manage the retention and deletion of a relatively large number of electronic documents that are stored in said system by a plurality of end users each of which has an interactive terminal connected to said system that includes a keyboard and a display device, said method comprising the following combination of steps, A) providing on said display, a screen image to allow the interactive entry of a set of document retention criteria that are used by said system to manage the automatic retention and deletion of said electronic documents, B) entering at least one of said criteria directly through said keyboard, and C) entering the remaining criteria automatically based on a logical analysis by said system involving the identity of said criteria entered in Step B) and pre-established information stored in said system.
2. The method recited in Claim 1 including the further step of A) verifying that said criteria directly entered into said system through said keyboard is valid and identifiable by said system so that the integrity of said step of entering said remaining criteria can be guaranteed prior to filing the associated document.
3. The method recited in Claim 2 including the further step of, A) establishing for each said end user a profile comprising a first set of allowable ownership labels for each said end user and a second set of allowable document labels for each said end user.
4. The method recited in Claim 3 including the further step of, A) establishing an expiration date for each said label of said first and second set.
5. The method recited in Claim 4 including the further step of, A) establishing a default document label for each of said ownership labels.
6. The method recited in Claim 5 including the further step of, A) establishing a default ownership label for each of said document labels.
7. The method recited in Claim 6 including the further step of, A) establishing a default ownership expiration date for each of said ownership labels.
8. The method recited in Claim 7 including the further step of, A) establishing a default document expiration date for each of said document labels.
9. The method recited in Claim 8 including the further step of, A) establishing for each of said ownership labels a rule for logically relating the corresponding ownership expiration date to the document expiration date.
10. The method recited in Claim 9 including the further step of, A) establishing for each said document label a rule for logically relating the corresponding document expiration date to the ownership expiration date.
11. A method for automatically providing the retention criteria employed to manage the retention of a relatively large number of electronic documents, said method comprising the following combination of steps, A) entering at least one of said criteria directly through a keyboard, and B) entering any remaining criteria automatically based on a logical analysis by said system involving the identity of said criteria entered in Step A) and preestablished information stored in said system.
Applications Claiming Priority (2)
| Application Number | Priority Date | Filing Date | Title |
|---|---|---|---|
| US07/138,535 US5107419A (en) | 1987-12-23 | 1987-12-23 | Method of assigning retention and deletion criteria to electronic documents stored in an interactive information handling system |
| US07/138,535 | 1987-12-23 |
Publications (1)
| Publication Number | Publication Date |
|---|---|
| CA1306069C true CA1306069C (en) | 1992-08-04 |
Family
ID=22482458
Family Applications (1)
| Application Number | Title | Priority Date | Filing Date |
|---|---|---|---|
| CA000578288A Expired - Fee Related CA1306069C (en) | 1987-12-23 | 1988-09-23 | Method of assigning retention and deletion criteria to electronic documents stored in an interactive information handling system |
Country Status (5)
| Country | Link |
|---|---|
| US (1) | US5107419A (en) |
| EP (1) | EP0323025A3 (en) |
| JP (1) | JPH065510B2 (en) |
| BR (1) | BR8806831A (en) |
| CA (1) | CA1306069C (en) |
Families Citing this family (81)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EP0328684B1 (en) * | 1987-08-28 | 1994-05-18 | Honda Giken Kogyo Kabushiki Kaisha | Document processing system |
| JP3114147B2 (en) * | 1990-09-10 | 2000-12-04 | インターナショナル・ビジネス・マシーンズ・コーポレ−ション | Method and apparatus for automatically starting a processing procedure for a document |
| US5247661A (en) * | 1990-09-10 | 1993-09-21 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and apparatus for automated document distribution in a data processing system |
| US5274804A (en) * | 1991-11-20 | 1993-12-28 | Parcplace Systems | Automatic storage-reclamation postmortem finalization process |
| US5428778A (en) * | 1992-02-13 | 1995-06-27 | Office Express Pty. Ltd. | Selective dissemination of information |
| US6151019A (en) * | 1992-04-15 | 2000-11-21 | Canon Kabushiki Kaisha | Method and apparatus for controlling access of stored data in a system having a plurality of information processing apparatuses connected to a network |
| US5438658A (en) * | 1992-11-13 | 1995-08-01 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method and system for time critical response management in a data processing system |
| GB2273182A (en) * | 1992-12-04 | 1994-06-08 | Ibm | Currency period of replicated data objects. |
| US5689699A (en) * | 1992-12-23 | 1997-11-18 | International Business Machines Corporation | Dynamic verification of authorization in retention management schemes for data processing systems |
| US5649131A (en) * | 1992-12-30 | 1997-07-15 | Lucent Technologies Inc. | Communications protocol |
| EP0606718A3 (en) * | 1992-12-30 | 1998-10-21 | AT&T Corp. | Communications protocol for exchanging interface information between a host and a terminal |
| US5448490A (en) * | 1993-03-23 | 1995-09-05 | Pitney Bowes Inc. | System and method for two level real-time control for an inserting machine |
| US5813015A (en) * | 1993-06-07 | 1998-09-22 | International Business Machine Corp. | Method and apparatus for increasing available storage space on a computer system by disposing of data with user defined characteristics |
| US6202058B1 (en) | 1994-04-25 | 2001-03-13 | Apple Computer, Inc. | System for ranking the relevance of information objects accessed by computer users |
| US5724567A (en) * | 1994-04-25 | 1998-03-03 | Apple Computer, Inc. | System for directing relevance-ranked data objects to computer users |
| US5682538A (en) * | 1994-08-12 | 1997-10-28 | Wall Data Incorporated | Automatic adaptive computer screen generation |
| WO1996007148A1 (en) * | 1994-08-26 | 1996-03-07 | Kondratiev Andrei Valentinovic | Textual or graphic data transmission system and a consumer information device for the system |
| US5659732A (en) * | 1995-05-17 | 1997-08-19 | Infoseek Corporation | Document retrieval over networks wherein ranking and relevance scores are computed at the client for multiple database documents |
| JPH08331175A (en) * | 1995-05-31 | 1996-12-13 | Sony Corp | Method for controlling information and device therefor |
| US5813009A (en) * | 1995-07-28 | 1998-09-22 | Univirtual Corp. | Computer based records management system method |
| US5812984A (en) * | 1996-05-13 | 1998-09-22 | Goltra; Peter S. | Method for entering information into an electronic patient chart, and protocol auto-negative capabilities |
| AU4495597A (en) | 1996-09-23 | 1998-04-14 | Lowrie Mcintosh | Defining a uniform subject classification system incorporating document management/records retention functions |
| US6137864A (en) * | 1997-07-25 | 2000-10-24 | Lucent Technologies Inc. | Specifiable delete times for voice messaging |
| US6314421B1 (en) | 1998-05-12 | 2001-11-06 | David M. Sharnoff | Method and apparatus for indexing documents for message filtering |
| JP4081858B2 (en) * | 1998-06-04 | 2008-04-30 | ソニー株式会社 | Computer system, computer terminal device, and recording medium |
| US6336124B1 (en) * | 1998-10-01 | 2002-01-01 | Bcl Computers, Inc. | Conversion data representing a document to other formats for manipulation and display |
| US6823338B1 (en) | 1998-11-19 | 2004-11-23 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method, mechanism and computer program product for processing sparse hierarchical ACL data in a relational database |
| TW460812B (en) * | 1999-03-31 | 2001-10-21 | Ibm | Automated file pruning |
| US7430714B1 (en) | 1999-04-30 | 2008-09-30 | Ricoh Company, Ltd. | Document storage system including a user interface for associating documents into groups |
| US20070260974A1 (en) * | 1999-12-27 | 2007-11-08 | Hauser Carl H | System and method for assigning a disposition to a document through information flow knowledge |
| WO2001093081A2 (en) * | 2000-06-02 | 2001-12-06 | First To File, Inc. | Computer-implemented method for securing intellectual property |
| US20020116363A1 (en) * | 2000-11-27 | 2002-08-22 | First To File, Inc. | Method of deleting unnecessary information from a database |
| US20020111824A1 (en) * | 2000-11-27 | 2002-08-15 | First To File, Inc. | Method of defining workflow rules for managing intellectual property |
| US20020161733A1 (en) * | 2000-11-27 | 2002-10-31 | First To File, Inc. | Method of creating electronic prosecution experience for patent applicant |
| US20020065676A1 (en) * | 2000-11-27 | 2002-05-30 | First To File, Inc. | Computer implemented method of generating information disclosure statements |
| US20020065675A1 (en) * | 2000-11-27 | 2002-05-30 | Grainger Jeffry J. | Computer implemented method of managing information disclosure statements |
| US20020111953A1 (en) * | 2000-11-27 | 2002-08-15 | First To File, Inc. | Docketing system |
| AU2002227040A1 (en) * | 2000-11-27 | 2002-06-03 | First To File, Inc. | Computer implemented method for controlling document edits |
| US20020093528A1 (en) * | 2000-11-27 | 2002-07-18 | First To File, Inc. | User interface for managing intellectual property |
| US20020087624A1 (en) * | 2000-12-28 | 2002-07-04 | Gateway, Inc. | Method and device for temporarily storing data |
| US20020138484A1 (en) * | 2001-03-26 | 2002-09-26 | Bialek Gerald Christopher | Business method and data structure for eliminating non-value-added data activity across a business continuum |
| US20030081001A1 (en) * | 2001-10-25 | 2003-05-01 | Munro Michael W. | Computer-assisted deletion of received electronic messages |
| US7233959B2 (en) * | 2002-06-03 | 2007-06-19 | International Business Machines Corporation | Life-cycle management engine |
| US20030204567A1 (en) * | 2002-04-26 | 2003-10-30 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for creating e-mail object attributes |
| US7254772B2 (en) * | 2002-07-30 | 2007-08-07 | Xerox Corporation | Systems and methods for visually representing the aging and/or expiration of electronic documents |
| AU2003263928A1 (en) * | 2002-08-19 | 2004-03-03 | Choicestream | Statistical personalized recommendation system |
| US8065277B1 (en) | 2003-01-17 | 2011-11-22 | Daniel John Gardner | System and method for a data extraction and backup database |
| US8375008B1 (en) | 2003-01-17 | 2013-02-12 | Robert Gomes | Method and system for enterprise-wide retention of digital or electronic data |
| US8630984B1 (en) | 2003-01-17 | 2014-01-14 | Renew Data Corp. | System and method for data extraction from email files |
| US8943024B1 (en) | 2003-01-17 | 2015-01-27 | Daniel John Gardner | System and method for data de-duplication |
| US7478096B2 (en) * | 2003-02-26 | 2009-01-13 | Burnside Acquisition, Llc | History preservation in a computer storage system |
| US7107416B2 (en) * | 2003-09-08 | 2006-09-12 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method, system, and program for implementing retention policies to archive records |
| US7117322B2 (en) * | 2003-09-08 | 2006-10-03 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method, system, and program for retention management and protection of stored objects |
| US7146388B2 (en) * | 2003-10-07 | 2006-12-05 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method, system, and program for archiving files |
| US9075851B2 (en) * | 2003-12-09 | 2015-07-07 | Emc Corporation | Method and apparatus for data retention in a storage system |
| US20050132010A1 (en) * | 2003-12-12 | 2005-06-16 | International Business Machines Corporation | Scheduled electronic mail deletions |
| US7409641B2 (en) * | 2003-12-29 | 2008-08-05 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for replying to related messages |
| US7818680B2 (en) * | 2003-12-29 | 2010-10-19 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for deleting related messages |
| US7412437B2 (en) * | 2003-12-29 | 2008-08-12 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for searching and retrieving related messages |
| US8805933B2 (en) * | 2003-12-29 | 2014-08-12 | Google Inc. | System and method for building interest profiles from related messages |
| US8069151B1 (en) | 2004-12-08 | 2011-11-29 | Chris Crafford | System and method for detecting incongruous or incorrect media in a data recovery process |
| US20060123232A1 (en) * | 2004-12-08 | 2006-06-08 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for protecting and managing retention of data on worm media |
| US8024572B2 (en) * | 2004-12-22 | 2011-09-20 | Aol Inc. | Data storage and removal |
| US20060149725A1 (en) * | 2005-01-03 | 2006-07-06 | Ritter Gerd M | Managing electronic documents |
| US8527468B1 (en) * | 2005-02-08 | 2013-09-03 | Renew Data Corp. | System and method for management of retention periods for content in a computing system |
| US7801863B2 (en) * | 2005-03-04 | 2010-09-21 | Microsoft Corporation | Method and computer-readable medium for formula-based document retention |
| JP2008545200A (en) * | 2005-06-28 | 2008-12-11 | チョイスストリーム インコーポレイテッド | Method and apparatus for a statistical system for targeting advertisements |
| US7720825B2 (en) * | 2005-10-21 | 2010-05-18 | International Business Machines Corporation | System and method for enabling records management |
| US8150827B2 (en) * | 2006-06-07 | 2012-04-03 | Renew Data Corp. | Methods for enhancing efficiency and cost effectiveness of first pass review of documents |
| US8175989B1 (en) | 2007-01-04 | 2012-05-08 | Choicestream, Inc. | Music recommendation system using a personalized choice set |
| US20080228900A1 (en) * | 2007-03-14 | 2008-09-18 | Disney Enterprises, Inc. | Method and system for facilitating the transfer of a computer file |
| US8615490B1 (en) | 2008-01-31 | 2013-12-24 | Renew Data Corp. | Method and system for restoring information from backup storage media |
| US8419806B2 (en) * | 2009-05-05 | 2013-04-16 | Absolute Software Corporation | Discriminating data protection system |
| US20110066497A1 (en) * | 2009-09-14 | 2011-03-17 | Choicestream, Inc. | Personalized advertising and recommendation |
| WO2011072172A1 (en) * | 2009-12-09 | 2011-06-16 | Renew Data Corp. | System and method for quickly determining a subset of irrelevant data from large data content |
| WO2011075610A1 (en) | 2009-12-16 | 2011-06-23 | Renew Data Corp. | System and method for creating a de-duplicated data set |
| US9047228B2 (en) * | 2012-07-26 | 2015-06-02 | Sap Se | Systems and methods for data privacy and destruction |
| US9378337B2 (en) * | 2013-06-19 | 2016-06-28 | Sap Se | Data item deletion in a database system |
| WO2015010099A1 (en) * | 2013-07-19 | 2015-01-22 | Minder, LLC | Systems and methods for managing and organizing documents |
| US10152753B2 (en) * | 2014-10-16 | 2018-12-11 | Hartford Fire Insurance Company | Medical risk underwriting system |
| US11526562B2 (en) * | 2019-12-16 | 2022-12-13 | Motorola Solutions, Inc. | Device, system and method for controlling document access using hierarchical paths |
Family Cites Families (23)
| Publication number | Priority date | Publication date | Assignee | Title |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| US4142234A (en) * | 1977-11-28 | 1979-02-27 | International Business Machines Corporation | Bias filter memory for filtering out unnecessary interrogations of cache directories in a multiprocessor system |
| JPH0677237B2 (en) * | 1982-07-08 | 1994-09-28 | キヤノン株式会社 | Electronic file device |
| US4578766A (en) * | 1983-09-01 | 1986-03-25 | The United States Of America As Represented By The Secretary Of The Navy | Computer-aided process for generating camera-ready graphical artwork |
| JPS6146554A (en) * | 1984-08-10 | 1986-03-06 | Fujitsu Ltd | Documentation device |
| US4658351A (en) * | 1984-10-09 | 1987-04-14 | Wang Laboratories, Inc. | Task control means for a multi-tasking data processing system |
| JPS61139825A (en) * | 1984-12-12 | 1986-06-27 | Canon Inc | Information filing device |
| JPS61190751A (en) * | 1985-02-19 | 1986-08-25 | Hitachi Maxell Ltd | Disk drive device |
| US4843538A (en) * | 1985-04-30 | 1989-06-27 | Prometrix Corporation | Multi-level dynamic menu which suppresses display of items previously designated as non-selectable |
| US4679137A (en) * | 1985-04-30 | 1987-07-07 | Prometrix Corporation | Process control interface system for designer and operator |
| US4873623A (en) * | 1985-04-30 | 1989-10-10 | Prometrix Corporation | Process control interface with simultaneously displayed three level dynamic menu |
| US4805089A (en) * | 1985-04-30 | 1989-02-14 | Prometrix Corporation | Process control interface system for managing measurement data |
| US4974149A (en) * | 1985-08-02 | 1990-11-27 | Wang Laboratories, Inc. | Data distribution apparatus and method having a data description including information for specifying a time that a data distribution is to occur |
| US4730252A (en) * | 1985-09-24 | 1988-03-08 | International Business Machines Corp. | Document composition from parts inventory |
| US4758956A (en) * | 1986-04-25 | 1988-07-19 | Amoco Corporation | System for replacing defective portions of log data |
| US4791281A (en) * | 1986-10-16 | 1988-12-13 | C.P.C. Investment Trust | Encoding and decoding system |
| US4807155A (en) * | 1987-01-29 | 1989-02-21 | International Business Machines Corporation | Electronic calendaring method for confirmation of resource availability during event calendaring |
| US4817018A (en) * | 1987-01-29 | 1989-03-28 | International Business Machines Corporation | Electronic calendaring method which provides for automatic assignment of alternates in requested events |
| US4807154A (en) * | 1987-01-29 | 1989-02-21 | International Business Machines Corporation | Method for developing automatic replies in an interactive electronic calendaring system |
| US4785399A (en) * | 1987-03-03 | 1988-11-15 | International Business Machines Corporation | Shaping geometric objects by cumulative translational sweeps |
| US4823310A (en) * | 1987-08-10 | 1989-04-18 | Wang Laboratories, Inc. | Device for enabling concurrent access of indexed sequential data files |
| US4939668A (en) * | 1987-08-24 | 1990-07-03 | International Business Machines Corp. | System for designing intercommunications networks |
| US4985855A (en) * | 1987-08-24 | 1991-01-15 | International Business Machines Corp. | Method for producing installation instructions for three dimensional assemblies |
| US4849883A (en) * | 1987-10-28 | 1989-07-18 | International Business Machines Corp. | Professional office system printer support for personal computers |
-
1987
- 1987-12-23 US US07/138,535 patent/US5107419A/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
-
1988
- 1988-09-23 CA CA000578288A patent/CA1306069C/en not_active Expired - Fee Related
- 1988-11-19 JP JP63291132A patent/JPH065510B2/en not_active Expired - Lifetime
- 1988-11-23 EP EP19880311068 patent/EP0323025A3/en not_active Withdrawn
- 1988-12-22 BR BR888806831A patent/BR8806831A/en not_active Application Discontinuation
Also Published As
| Publication number | Publication date |
|---|---|
| JPH065510B2 (en) | 1994-01-19 |
| EP0323025A3 (en) | 1992-03-11 |
| BR8806831A (en) | 1989-08-29 |
| US5107419A (en) | 1992-04-21 |
| JPH01173159A (en) | 1989-07-07 |
| EP0323025A2 (en) | 1989-07-05 |
Similar Documents
| Publication | Publication Date | Title |
|---|---|---|
| CA1306069C (en) | Method of assigning retention and deletion criteria to electronic documents stored in an interactive information handling system | |
| US4899299A (en) | Method for managing the retention of electronic documents in an interactive information handling system | |
| CA1312145C (en) | Method to manage transfer of ownership of electronic document in an interactive information handling system | |
| US6266683B1 (en) | Computerized document management system | |
| US20040205534A1 (en) | System and method for providing access to forms and maintaining the data used to complete the forms | |
| US8028231B2 (en) | Document management system for searching scanned documents | |
| Devlin et al. | An architecture for a business and information system | |
| US10114821B2 (en) | Method and system to access to electronic business documents | |
| JPH02278458A (en) | Electronic document approval system | |
| JPH09508995A (en) | Method and apparatus for controlling access to a database | |
| US5423038A (en) | Specialized data management method | |
| US20050226261A1 (en) | System and method for automatic indexing and archiving of paper documents | |
| US5758334A (en) | File system remount operation with selectable access modes that saves knowledge of the volume path and does not interrupt an executing process upon changing modes | |
| MXPA05001674A (en) | Methods and systems for providing automated actions on recognized text strings in a computer-generated document. | |
| WO2005116816A2 (en) | Record management and retrieval computer program and method | |
| US20040205531A1 (en) | Method and application for developing a statement of work | |
| EP0774725A2 (en) | Method and apparatus for distributing conditional work flow processes among a plurality of users | |
| JPH07239854A (en) | Image filing system | |
| JP5183866B2 (en) | Electronic form security management method and electronic form server apparatus | |
| CA2560404A1 (en) | Document management system | |
| Nathan | Calhoun | |
| Ucman et al. | Design and Implementation of the Combined Federal Campaign Collection System | |
| Nathan | COPS for windows: a small-scale, networked, information system | |
| Gray | CDMS: CAD data set system design description. Revision 1 | |
| Smith | New explosion in London underground” |
Legal Events
| Date | Code | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| MKLA | Lapsed |