| United States Patent Application |
20080195372
|
| Kind Code
|
A1
|
|
Chin; Jeffrey
;   et al.
|
August 14, 2008
|
Machine Translation Feedback
Abstract
Methods, program products and systems for first receiving an indication
of when a user-manipulable cursor is positioned in proximity to a first
presentation of first text in a graphical user interface (GUI), the first
text being in a first language. In response to the first receiving,
causing a second presentation in the GUI of second text in a distinct
second language, where the second text represents a translation of the
first text into the second language or the first text represents a
translation of the second text into the first language. Second user input
to the GUI is received providing an alternate translation of the first
text to the second text or the second text to the first text.
| Inventors: |
Chin; Jeffrey; (San Francisco, CA)
; Rosart; Daniel; (Mountain View, CA)
|
| Correspondence Address:
|
FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
PO BOX 1022
MINNEAPOLIS
MN
55440-1022
US
|
| Serial No.:
|
675034 |
| Series Code:
|
11
|
| Filed:
|
February 14, 2007 |
| Current U.S. Class: |
704/2 |
| Class at Publication: |
704/2 |
| International Class: |
G06F 17/28 20060101 G06F017/28 |
Claims
1. A computer-implemented method, comprising: first receiving an
indication of when a user-manipulable cursor is positioned in proximity
to a first presentation of first text in a graphical user interface
(GUI), the first text being in a first language; in response to the first
receiving, causing a second presentation in the GUI of second text in a
distinct second language, where the second text represents a translation
of the first text into the second language or the first text represents a
translation of the second text into the first language; and second
receiving user input to the GUI providing an alternate translation of the
first text to the second text or the second text to the first text.
2. The method of claim 1, further comprising: determining if the
alternate translation is SPAM and discarding the alternate translation if
the alternate translation is SPAM.
3. The method of claim 2 where determining includes: determining if the
alternate translation is one or more of: empty, the same as the first
text or the second text, has a low probability of occurrence in the first
language or the second language, contains an obscene word, or was
submitted by a user who is suspect.
4. The method of claim 1, further comprising: automatically providing the
first text, the second text, and the alternate translation to a human
reviewer.
5. The method of claim 1, further comprising: automatically providing the
first text, the second text, and the alternate translation to a community
review process.
6. The method of claim 1, further comprising: identifying the first text
by examining text represented in the first presentation that is in
proximity to the cursor.
7. The method of claim 6 where the first text represents a subset of the
text in the first presentation.
8. The method of claim 1 where the first text is a sentence.
9. The method of claim 1 where the second presentation overlays the first
presentation in the GUI.
10. The method of claim 1, further comprising: causing a third
presentation in the GUI, the third presentation including one or more
previously provided alternate translations.
11. A computer program product, encoded on a computer-readable medium,
operable to cause data processing apparatus to perform operations
comprising: first receiving an indication of when a user-manipulable
cursor is positioned in proximity to a first presentation of first text
in a graphical user interface (GUI), the first text being in a first
language; in response to the first receiving, causing a second
presentation in the GUI of second text in a distinct second language,
where the second text represents a translation of the first text into the
second language or the first text represents a translation of the second
text into the first language; and second receiving user input to the GUI
providing an alternate translation of the first text to the second text
or the second text to the first text.
12. The program product of claim 11, further comprising: determining if
the alternate translation is SPAM and discarding the alternate
translation if the alternate translation is SPAM.
13. The program product of claim 12 where determining includes:
determining if the alternate translation is one or more of: empty, the
same as the first text or the second text, has a low probability of
occurrence in the first language or the second language, contains an
obscene word, or was submitted by a user who is suspect.
14. The program product of claim 11, further comprising: automatically
providing the first text, the second text, and the alternate translation
to a human reviewer.
15. The program product of claim 11, further comprising: automatically
providing the first text, the second text, and the alternate translation
to a community review process.
16. The program product of claim 11, further comprising: identifying the
first text by examining text represented in the first presentation that
is in proximity to the cursor.
17. The program product of claim 16 where the first text represents a
subset of the text in the first presentation.
18. The program product of claim 11 where the first text is a sentence.
19. The program product of claim 11 where the second presentation
overlays the first presentation in the GUI.
20. The program product of claim 11, further comprising: causing a third
presentation in the GUI, the third presentation including one or more
previously provided alternate translations.
21. A system comprising: a display device for presenting a graphical user
interface (GUI) to a user; one or more input devices configured to
receive input from the user; and processor electronics configured to
perform operations comprising: first receiving an indication of when a
user-manipulable cursor is positioned in proximity to a first
presentation of first text in a graphical user interface (GUI), the first
text being in a first language; in response to the first receiving,
causing a second presentation in the GUI of second text in a distinct
second language, where the second text represents a translation of the
first text into the second language or the first text represents a
translation of the second text into the first language; and second
receiving user input to the GUI providing an alternate translation of the
first text to the second text or the second text to the first text.
22. The system of claim 21, further comprising: determining if the
alternate translation is SPAM and discarding the alternate translation if
the alternate translation is SPAM.
23. The system of claim 22 where determining includes: determining if the
alternate translation is one or more of: empty, the same as the first
text or the second text, has a low probability of occurrence in the first
language or the second language, contains an obscene word, or was
submitted by a user who is suspect.
24. The system of claim 21, further comprising: automatically providing
the first text, the second text, and the alternate translation to a human
reviewer.
25. The system of claim 21, further comprising: automatically providing
the first text, the second text, and the alternate translation to a
community review process.
26. The system of claim 21, further comprising: identifying the first
text by examining text represented in the first presentation that is in
proximity to the cursor.
27. The system of claim 26 where the first text represents a subset of
the text in the first presentation.
28. The system of claim 21 where the first text is a sentence.
29. The system of claim 21 where the second presentation overlays the
first presentation in the GUI.
30. The system of claim 21, further comprising: causing a third
presentation in the GUI, the third presentation including one or more
previously provided alternate translations.
31. A computer-implemented method, comprising: first receiving an
indication of when a user-manipulable cursor is positioned in proximity
to a first presentation of first text in a graphical user interface
(GUI), the first text being in a first language; in response to the first
receiving, causing a second presentation in the GUI of second text in a
distinct second language, where the second text represents a translation
of the first text into the second language or the first text represents a
translation of the second text into the first language; and second
receiving user input to the GUI providing feedback pertaining to the
translation of the first text to the second text or the second text to
the first text, where the feedback is one of: a rating, selection of an
alternate translation, or an indication of whether the translation is
inappropriate.
32. The method of claim 31 where determining includes: determining if the
alternate translation is one or more of: empty, the same as the first
text or the second text, has a low probability of occurrence in the first
language or the second language, contains an obscene word, or was
submitted by a user who is suspect.
Description
BACKGROUND
[0001] Translation from one human language (a source language) to another
human language (a target language) can be done in various ways. Machine
translation uses computers to automate part of or the entire translation
process. Many websites on the Internet provide machine translation to
allow for easy access to information in different languages. Rule-based
machine translation and statistical machine translation are two examples
of machine translation systems (MTS's). Such websites usually do not
provide a means for users to easily provide feedback on the translation
quality, however. If users find a translation to be incorrect or
culturally offensive, for example, typically their only resort is to send
an email message to the website operator who may or may not route the
message to the appropriate person. In addition, the message might omit
the source language version of the text, the translation at issue, or a
corrected version of the translation. This makes it exceedingly difficult
to analyze translation errors and improve the quality of machine
translation based on user feedback.
SUMMARY
[0002] In general, one aspect of the subject matter described in this
specification can be embodied in a method that includes a method for
first receiving an indication of when a user-manipulable cursor is
positioned in proximity to a first presentation of first text in a
graphical user interface (GUI), the first text being in a first language.
In response to the first receiving, causing a second presentation in the
GUI of second text in a distinct second language, where the second text
represents a translation of the first text into the second language or
the first text represents a translation of the second text into the first
language. Second user input to the GUI is received providing an alternate
translation of the first text to the second text or the second text to
the first text. Other implementations of this aspect include
corresponding systems, apparatus, and computer program products.
[0003] These and other implementations can optionally include one or more
of the following features. If the alternate translation is determined to
be SPAM and it is discarded, where determining includes deciding if the
alternate translation is one or more of: empty, the same as the first
text or the second text, has a low probability of occurrence in the first
language or the second language, contains an obscene word, or was
submitted by a user who is suspect. The first text, the second text, and
the alternate translation are automatically provided to a human reviewer.
The first text, the second text, and the alternate translation are
automatically provided to a community review process. The first text is
identified by examining text represented in the first presentation that
is in proximity to the cursor. The first text represents a subset of the
text in the first presentation. The first text is a sentence. The second
presentation overlays the first presentation in the GUI. A third
presentation is displayed in the GUI which includes one or more
previously provided alternate translations.
[0004] In general, one aspect of the subject matter described in this
specification can be embodied in a method that includes receiving an
indication of when a user-manipulable cursor is positioned in proximity
to a first presentation of first text in a graphical user interface
(GUI), the first text being in a first language. In response to the
receiving, causing a second presentation in the GUI of second text in a
distinct second language, where the second text represents a translation
of the first text into the second language or the first text represents a
translation of the second text into the first language. User input to the
GUI is received providing feedback pertaining to the translation of the
first text to the second text or the second text to the first text, where
the feedback is one of: a rating, selection of an alternate translation,
or an indication of whether the translation is inappropriate. Other
implementations of this aspect include corresponding systems, apparatus,
and computer program products.
[0005] These and other implementations can optionally include one or more
of the following features: determining if the alternate translation is
one or more of: empty, the same as the first text or the second text, has
a low probability of occurrence in the first language or the second
language, contains an obscene word, or was submitted by a user who is
suspect.
[0006] Particular implementations of the subject matter described in this
specification can be implemented to realize one or more of the following
advantages. Text is automatically selected based on the location of a
cursor. A translation feedback window for the selected text is
automatically displayed. Users can easily compare a translated portion of
selected text with corresponding text in a source language and submit an
alternate (better) translation if necessary. Along with the user provided
alternate translation, the source text and the original translation are
automatically included with the user feedback. Addition information can
also be automatically included with the feedback to further aid analysis
of the machine translation error. User provided alternate translations
are automatically analyzed to determine if they are SPAM and, if so, they
are discarded. User feedback is automatically routed to the appropriate
parties for individual or community review. Even monolingual speakers can
submit alternate translations if the surrounding context of the
translation makes it clear that there is an error. User translation
feedback is enabled for an entire translated document or merely a
fragment of translated text. User feedback collection is not disruptive
to the user's reading experience. The technique for obtaining feedback
can be implemented with the languages reversed.
[0007] The details of one or more implementations of the invention are set
forth in the accompanying drawings and the description below. Other
features, aspects, and advantages of the invention will become apparent
from the description, the drawings, and the claims.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
[0008] FIG. 1A is an illustration of a webpage that has been translated
from Russian to English.
[0009] FIG. 1B is an illustration of a translation feedback window.
[0010] FIG. 1C is an illustration of a user-provided alternate
translation.
[0011] FIG. 2A is an illustration of another translation feedback window.
[0012] FIG. 2B is an illustration of a ratings feedback window.
[0013] FIG. 2C is an illustration of a translation selection window.
[0014] FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram of a system for obtaining user
translation feedback.
[0015] FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram of a system for routing user
translation feedback.
[0016] FIG. 5 shows a flowchart for obtaining user translation feedback.
[0017] Like reference numbers and designations in the various drawings
indicate like elements.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
[0018] FIG. 1A illustrates a rendering or "presentation" of an electronic
document 100 in a graphical user interface (GUI). Generally speaking, an
electronic document or "document" contains text in at least one human
language. A document can be a hypertext markup language document (HTML),
an eXtensible Markup Language (XML) document, or a word processing
document, for example. Some documents contain content in addition to text
such as images and other data, including embedded content. Moreover, a
document does not necessarily correspond to a file. A document may be
stored in a portion of a file that holds other documents, in a single
file dedicated to the document in question, or in multiple coordinated
files. Documents can be stored in memory without having first been stored
in a file.
[0019] A GUI is capable of presenting a document's text on a display
device such as a computer monitor or other display. Web browsers such as
Mozilla Firefox which are capable of presenting documents on display
devices utilize GUI libraries integrated into host operating systems
(e.g., Microsoft Windows, available from Microsoft Corporation of
Redmond, Wash. and Mac OS X, available from Apple Inc. of Cupertino,
Calif.). GUIs typically include functionality to allow users to
interactively manipulate document presentations. GUIs are provided on
most consumer computer devices such as personal computers, mobile phones,
personal digital assistances, digital media players, electronic gaming
devices, and electronic book readers. The techniques for obtaining user
translation feedback described herein are applicable to all such devices.
Moreover, these techniques can be used in combination with a wide variety
of software applications including, but not limited to, web browsers,
word processors, document reading software, and other applications which
display text.
[0020] Users interact with the presentation of a document (e.g., 100) in a
GUI by using an input device such as a mouse or other suitable device.
The input device has a visual representation (e.g., 102) or "cursor" on
the display device that allows users to select text in the presentation.
Users can position the cursor 102 over a section of the presentation 100.
Text 110 that is in proximity to the mouse cursor 102 is automatically
selected, as shown in FIG. 1B. In various implementations, the selected
text can is automatically highlighted in the presentation 100. In some
implementations, text deemed to be within the proximity of the cursor 102
is the sentence that is beneath the cursor's 102 hotspot. In other
implementations, the selected text is the paragraph beneath the cursor's
102 hotspot. In yet further implementations, the selected text is text
within a predetermined or dynamically determined region surrounding the
cursor's 102 hotspot and is delimited on word, sentence or paragraph
boundaries.
[0021] A document contains source text in a source language. A document's
source text can be automatically translated by a MTS to a target
language. For example, the document presentation 100 is an English
language translation of a Russian language news web page. In various
implementations, such a translation is accomplished by using a MTS such
as Google Translate, available from Google Inc., of Mountain View, Calif.
However, other MTSs can be used. Google Translate can translate an
arbitrary amount of text, including an entire webpage, from a source
language (e.g., Chinese, Japanese, Korean and Vietnamese) to a target
language (e.g., English, French, Russian). By way of illustration, users
can enter the uniform resource locator (URL) of the webpage they wish
translated into a text field on the Google Translate webpage and then
select the source and target languages. Google Translate uses a MTS to
translate the visible text in the webpage from the source language to the
target language. The user's browser is then redirected to a translated
version of the webpage.
[0022] A translation feedback window 106 is automatically presented in the
GUI when users position the cursor 102 over the text (e.g., 110) of a
document. The feedback window 106 is displayed over the document
presentation 100 and near the cursor 102, for instance, or the feedback
window 106 can be incorporated into another portion of the GUI such that
the document presentation 100 is not obscured. If the presentation 100 is
of translated text (in a target language), the feedback window 202
displays the corresponding source text (in a source language) in feedback
window region 104. Alternatively, if the presentation 100 is of a
document's source text, the feedback window region 104 displays a
translation of the selected text 110 into a target language. In a further
alternative, instead of displaying a feedback window 106, the text that
would be displayed in region 104 instead replaces the selected text 110
in the presentation 100 if the cursor 102 hovers on the selected text 110
for a predetermined time period. The selected text 110 is automatically
changed back when the cursor is moved away from the selected text 110.
[0023] Users may find that a given translation as shown in the
presentation 100 or in the feedback window 106 is incorrect. The feedback
window 106 enables users to provide suggestions for alternate
translations. By selecting the "Suggest a better translation" link 108, a
text entry region 112 is opened in the feedback window 106 (as shown in
FIG. 1C) into which the user can enter an alternate translation. In some
implementations, the text entry region 112 is pre-populated with text
that the user can edit. If the presentation 100 is of translated text,
the text entry region 112 is pre-populated with the selected text 110.
Otherwise, the text entry region 112 is pre-populated with the selected
text 110 translated into a target language. Users can edit the text or
replace it entirely. Users select the "contribute" button 114 to submit
their alternate translation to a translation feedback system, which is
described below. In addition to the alternate translation, the feedback
automatically includes the source text in the source language and the
translation of the source text to the target language.
[0024] FIG. 2A is an illustration of another feedback window 200 through
which users can provide other types feedback. As before, if the
presentation 100 is of translated text, the region 104 displays the
corresponding source text. Alternatively, if the presentation 100 is of a
document's source text, the region 104 displays a translation of the
selected text 110 into a target language. Users are given the opportunity
to rate the quality, correctness or usefulness of the translation using,
for instance, a star rating 202 or other scoring mechanism. For example,
a translation which receives five stars is considered excellent whereas a
translation which receives one star is considered unacceptable.
Alternatively, or in addition to a rating, users can submit written
comments on the translation quality. A GUI button 208 (or other GUI
element) allows users to view ratings from other users, including their
comments, as shown in window region 212 in FIG. 2B. In further
implementations, users can also flag a translation as being culturally
inappropriate using a simple GUI checkbox 204 (FIG. 2A) or other GUI
element.
[0025] With reference to FIG. 2C, the feedback window 200 allows users to
review alternate translations considered by a MTS for the selected text
110, alternate translations submitted by other users (e.g., as shown in
FIG. 1C), or combinations of these, and pick one which they believe is
better than the current translation. Users select the "Select Alternate
Translation" button 206 (or other GUI element) which causes the list of
alternate translations 210 to be displayed, as shown in FIG. 2C. Users
can choose a better translation by selecting a checkbox (e.g., 214) or
other GUI element. If the MTS is a statistical system, the list 210 can
include top translation possibilities that scored below the current
translation.
[0026] The additional feedback described in reference to FIGS. 2A, 2B and
2C is automatically provided to the translation feedback system and
includes the source text in the source language and the translation of
the source text in the target language. In addition, the feedback can
include other information relating to the state of the MTS when the
translation was performed such as, for instance, alternate translations
the MTS considered but did not elect for the selected text 110. All of
this information can be used to improve the quality of the MTS.
[0027] FIG. 3 is a schematic diagram of a system for obtaining user
feedback of a machine translation. A client 304 (e.g., a web browser or
other application) and a server 306 each include components that may
reside on the same or on different computing devices connected by one or
more networks (e.g., the Internet) such as personal computers, mobile
phones, workstations, servers, and other suitable devices. Moreover,
there may be fewer or more components than illustrated. In various
implementations, users submit a document or a reference to a document
(e.g., a URL for a web page) 322 to a MTS 326 through a web portal (e.g.,
Google Translate) served by a web server 324. The web server 324 fetches
the document 322 and provides it to the MTS 326. The MTS 326 translates
the document's text in a source language to a target language on behalf
of the web server 324.
[0028] By way of illustration, the MTS 326 can be rules-based or
statistical. In the case of a statistical MTS, translation is learned
from previously translated texts. A language model 320 provides
probabilities of words and word combinations occurring in a target
language to the MTS 326. A translation model 318 provides probabilities
that a given word or combination of words in a source language are
translated into one or more words in a target language. The MTS 326
translates text by looking at adjacent sequences of one or more words in
a source text to find the most probably translation of the text in the
translation model 318. The language model 320 is used to ensure fluency
by demoting possible translations that have words or word combinations
with a low probability of occurrence in the target language.
[0029] The web server 324 provides the translated web page 330 to the
client 304. In some implementations, the translated web page 330 includes
the original source text in the source language which is not visible when
the web page is rendered by the client 304 (e.g., the original source
text is marked as hidden). Alternatively, the web server 324 provides the
web page 330 to the client 304 such that the original source text is
visible and the translated text will not be visible when the web page is
rendered by the client 305. The client processes the web page 330 by
populating a Document Object Model (DOM) 316 with a representation of the
web page 330. A DOM is a representation of a structured document such as
an HTML document. The DOM is used by the rendering engine 315 to present
the document on a display device 302.
[0030] In addition to the web page 330, or as part of it, the web server
324 provides a text selection component 308, an initialization component
310, and a feedback window component 312. Alternatively, these components
are already resident in the client 304. The components 308, 310 and 312
are comprised of JavaScript code (or code in another programming
language) that is executed by the client 304 as part of presenting the
web page 330 on the display device 302. The initialization component 310
sets up event handlers and timers for the text selection component 308
and the feedback window component 312, respectively. The text selection
component 308 is invoked when the cursor (e.g., 102) is moved over text
which as been translated and automatically selects (and highlights) the
text in proximity to the cursor (e.g., 110) by changing the selected
text's properties in the DOM 316.
[0031] If the cursor remains over the selected text for a predetermined
period of time, the feedback window component 312 causes the presentation
of a feedback window (e.g., 106 or 200) in proximity to the cursor. The
feedback window component pre-populates the window with original source
text or translated text corresponding to the selected text. This text can
be obtained from the DOM 316 (e.g., the hidden text) or can be obtained
by making a request to the web server 324. If the user submits feedback
through the feedback window, the feedback window component 312 transmits
the information to a translation feedback system 302 which will be
described with reference to FIG. 4. The feedback information includes the
source text, the translated text, and optionally other information such
as the state of the MTS when the translation of the selected text
occurred. MTS state information can be encoded in the web page 330 as
hidden information or obtained by making a request to the web server 324.
[0032] FIG. 4 is a schematic diagram of the translation feedback system
302. When user feedback is received by the system 302, the feedback is
initially stored in a translation store 402. Unsolicited, incomplete,
irrelevant, or inappropriate user feedback (so-called "SPAM") is filtered
out of the system 302 by a filter component 404. The filter component 404
characterizes user-provided alternate translations as SPAM if one or more
of the following conditions are true: [0033] The alternate translation
is empty or unchanged from the original translation; [0034] The alternate
translation contains obscene language; [0035] The same user is suspect:
the user has submitted more than a given number of alternate translation
within a given time period or the user has a history of submitting SPAM;
[0036] According to the MTS, the alternate translation has a low
probability of occurrence in the target language; or [0037] The alternate
translation contains redundant words.
[0038] Other filters are possible, including a filter that automatically
corrects misspellings in the alternate translation. Alternate
translations that are not filtered out as are automatically routed to a
trusted individual 404 to evaluate the alternate translation or to a
community review process 406 which allows individuals to vote on whether
they approve of the alternate translation. Since the alternate
translation is accompanied by the original source text and the translated
text, the person(s) reviewing the feedback have complete information in
which to make a judgment. In various implementations, if the alternate
translation is approved the alternate translation can be added to a
translation cache for the MTS 326 such that the alternate translation is
henceforth used instead of the original translation. Alternatively, the
alternate translation can be used to further train the MTS 326 by
incorporating the alternate translation into the language model 320 and
the translation model 318.
[0039] FIG. 5 is a flowchart 500 illustrating a method for obtaining an
alternate translation from a user. An indication of when a
user-manipulable cursor (e.g., cursor 102) is positioned in proximity to
a first presentation of first text (e.g., 100) in a GUI is received, the
first text being in a first language (step 502). A second presentation
(e.g., feedback window 106) in the GUI of second text in a distinct
second language is displayed (step 504). The second text represents a
translation of the first text into the second language or the first text
represents a translation of the second text into the first language.
Finally, user input to the GUI is received providing an alternate
translation of the first text to the second text or the second text to
the first text (step 506).
[0040] Implementations of the subject matter and the functional operations
described in this specification can be implemented in digital electronic
circuitry, or in computer software, firmware, or hardware, including the
structures disclosed in this specification and their structural
equivalents, or in combinations of one or more of them. Implementations
of the subject matter described in this specification can be implemented
as one or more computer program products, i.e., one or more modules of
computer program instructions encoded on a computer-readable medium for
execution by, or to control the operation of, data processing apparatus.
The computer-readable medium can be a machine-readable storage device, a
machine-readable storage substrate, a memory device, a composition of
matter effecting a machine-readable propagated signal, or a combination
of one or more of them.
[0041] The term "data processing apparatus" encompasses all apparatus,
devices, and machines for processing data, including by way of example a
programmable processor, a computer, or multiple processors or computers.
The apparatus can include, in addition to hardware, code that creates an
execution environment for the computer program in question, e.g., code
that constitutes processor firmware, a protocol stack, a database
management system, an operating system, or a combination of one or more
of them. A propagated signal is an artificially generated signal, e.g., a
machine-generated electrical, optical, or electromagnetic signal, that is
generated to encode information for transmission to suitable receiver
apparatus.
[0042] A computer program (also known as a program, software, software
application, script, or code) can be written in any form of programming
language, including compiled or interpreted languages, and it can be
deployed in any form, including as a stand-alone program or as a module,
component, subroutine, or other unit suitable for use in a computing
environment. A computer program does not necessarily correspond to a file
in a file system. A program can be stored in a portion of a file that
holds other programs or data (e.g., one or more scripts stored in a
markup language document), in a single file dedicated to the program in
question, or in multiple coordinated files (e.g., files that store one or
more modules, sub-programs, or portions of code). A computer program can
be deployed to be executed on one computer or on multiple computers that
are located at one site or distributed across multiple sites and
interconnected by a communication network.
[0043] The processes and logic flows described in this specification can
be performed by one or more programmable processors executing one or more
computer programs to perform functions by operating on input data and
generating output. The processes and logic flows can also be performed
by, and apparatus can also be implemented as, special purpose logic
circuitry, e.g., an FPGA (field programmable gate array) or an ASIC
(application-specific integrated circuit).
[0044] Processors suitable for the execution of a computer program
include, by way of example, both general and special purpose
microprocessors, and any one or more processors of any kind of digital
computer. Generally, a processor will receive instructions and data from
a read-only memory or a random access memory or both. The essential
elements of a computer are a processor for performing instructions and
one or more memory devices for storing instructions and data. Generally,
a computer will also include, or be operatively coupled to receive data
from or transfer data to, or both, one or more mass storage devices for
storing data, e.g., magnetic, magneto-optical disks, or optical disks.
However, a computer need not have such devices. Moreover, a computer can
be embedded in another device, e.g., a mobile telephone, a personal
digital assistant (PDA), a mobile audio player, a Global Positioning
System (GPS) receiver, to name just a few. Computer-readable media
suitable for storing computer program instructions and data include all
forms of non-volatile memory, media and memory devices, including by way
of example semiconductor memory devices, e.g., EPROM, EEPROM, and flash
memory devices; magnetic disks, e.g., internal hard disks or removable
disks; magneto-optical disks; and CD-ROM and DVD-ROM disks. The processor
and the memory can be supplemented by, or incorporated in, special
purpose logic circuitry.
[0045] To provide for interaction with a user, implementations of the
subject matter described in this specification can be implemented on a
computer having a display device, e.g., a CRT (cathode ray tube) or LCD
(liquid crystal display) monitor, for displaying information to the user
and a keyboard and a pointing device, e.g., a mouse or a trackball, by
which the user can provide input to the computer. Other kinds of devices
can be used to provide for interaction with a user as well; for example,
feedback provided to the user can be any form of sensory feedback, e.g.,
visual feedback, auditory feedback, or tactile feedback; and input from
the user can be received in any form, including acoustic, speech, or
tactile input.
[0046] Implementations of the subject matter described in this
specification can be implemented in a computing system that includes a
back-end component, e.g., as a data server, or that includes a middleware
component, e.g., an application server, or that includes a front-end
component, e.g., a client computer having a graphical user interface or a
Web browser through which a user can interact with an implementation of
the subject matter described is this specification, or any combination of
one or more such back-end, middleware, or front-end components. The
components of the system can be interconnected by any form or medium of
digital data communication, e.g., a communication network. Examples of
communication networks include a local area network ("LAN") and a wide
area network ("WAN"), e.g., the Internet.
[0047] The computing system can include clients and servers. A client and
server are generally remote from each other and typically interact
through a communication network. The relationship of client and server
arises by virtue of computer programs running on the respective computers
and having a client-server relationship to each other.
[0048] While this specification contains many specifics, these should not
be construed as limitations on the scope of the invention or of what may
be claimed, but rather as descriptions of features specific to particular
implementations of the invention. Certain features that are described in
this specification in the context of separate implementations can also be
implemented in combination in a single implementation. Conversely,
various features that are described in the context of a single
implementation can also be implemented in multiple implementations
separately or in any suitable subcombination. Moreover, although features
may be described above as acting in certain combinations and even
initially claimed as such, one or more features from a claimed
combination can in some cases be excised from the combination, and the
claimed combination may be directed to a subcombination or variation of a
subcombination.
[0049] Similarly, while operations are depicted in the drawings in a
particular order, this should not be understood as requiring that such
operations be performed in the particular order shown or in sequential
order, or that all illustrated operations be performed, to achieve
desirable results. In certain circumstances, multitasking and parallel
processing may be advantageous. Moreover, the separation of various
system components in the implementations described above should not be
understood as requiring such separation in all implementations, and it
should be understood that the described program components and systems
can generally be integrated together in a single software product or
packaged into multiple software products.
[0050] Thus, particular implementations of the invention have been
described. Other implementations are within the scope of the following
claims. For example, the actions recited in the claims can be performed
in a different order and still achieve desirable results.
* * * * *