Method for automatically reconciling entries on two copies of independently maintained electronic calendars

Description Submit all comments and votes

FIELD OF INVENTION

This invention relates in general to electronic calendaring methods, and in particular to a calendaring method in which a calendar owner can automatically and interactively reconcile independent entries made within a designated time span on two different copies of his calendar.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS:

1. Co-pending application Ser. No. 008,034 filed concurrently herewith, now U.S. Pat. No. 4,831,552 entitled "Method For Concurrently Displaying Entries From a Plurality of Different Electronic Calendars Based on Interactively Entered Criteria," and assigned to the assignee of the present application is directed to an electronic calendaring method in which a calendar owner can display a set of calendar entries from different calendars which have an interrelationship that the user defines by data that is entered into the system interactively.

2. Co-pending application Ser. No. 008,039 filed concurrently herewith, now U.S. Pat. No. 4,819,191 entitled "Electronic Calendaring Method to Establish Calendar Floating Triggers for Calendared Events and Processes" and assigned to the assignee of this application is directed to an electronic calendaring method in which a calendar owner can selectively trigger a predefined action and response to detecting one or more criteria related to the calendar event that has previously been defined and entered into the system.

3. U.S. Pat. No. 4,807,154, issued Feb. 21, 1989, Ser. No. 008,033 filed concurrently herewith, entitled "Method for Developing Automatic Replies in an Interactive Electronic Calendaring System," and assigned to the assignee of the present application is directed to an electronic calendaring method in which a calendar owner can respond automatically to requests for participation in events being calendared by another person. The nature of the reply is based on an analysis of the parameters set forth in the request and an algorithm employing a set of prioritized criteria that the calendar owner has established to provide the automatic response.

4. U.S. Pat. No. 4,807,155, issued Feb. 21, 1989, Ser. No. 008,036 filed concurrently herewith, entitled "Electronic Calendaring Method for Automatic Confirmation of Resource Availability During Event Calendaring", and assigned to the assignee of this application is directed to an electronic calendaring method in which a calendar owner, when calendaring an event such as a meeting, which requires, in addition to a meeting room, such articles as a projector, video conferencing equipment, etc., automatically receives confirmation that requested articles are available and reserved for the calendared meeting event.

5. Co-pending application Ser. No. 008,238 filed concurrently herewith, now U.S. Pat. No. 4,804,955 entitled "Electronic Calendaring Method Which Provides for Automatic Assignment of Alternates In Requested Events," and assigned to the assignee of this application is directed to an electronic calendaring method in which a calendar owner who receives a request to participate in a calendar even originated by another calendar owner, and currently being calendared by that owner, can establish an automatic response which reflects the assignment of an alternate to the event based on the relationship of the information that accompanies the request and criteria that the calendar owner has pre-established for each potential alternate.

BACKGROUND ART

The prior art has disclosed a number and variety of interactive electronic calendaring systems and method. The objective of all of these systems is primarily to assist the person who, for a number of different reasons, maintains a calendar of future events containing various information about the event at entry points on the calendar which relative to the time of the event.

The increase of personal computers and intelligent workstations in recent years has made it possible for calendar owners to establish and maintain their calendars on these interactive type data processing systems.

Two general types of interactive electronic calendaring systems have thus evolved in the art. In one type of calendaring system, the owner of the calendar is generally also the user of the workstation and that workstation is generally not a part of a larger network. Generally, in these types of systems, the calendar functions involve presenting a screen to the user representing a day calendar divided into a number of time periods or time slots. Each period is capable of displaying a limited amount of text that the user enters. In some systems, the day calendar can scroll vertically to present more time periods to the user or horizontally to present longer text entries. The operator can generally "page" forward or backward and, in most arrangements, can display a requested date. These calendaring methods generally do not limit the type of event that is calendared nor the terminology employed at any of the entry points and, to that extent, function in the same manner as conventional manual calendars or appointment books.

The electronic calendaring method and systems do have an advantage over the prior art manual calendaring of events in that the user generally has the ability to scan a time span involving a large number of days and identify calendared events quite rapidly.

The other type of calendaring arrangement that has developed in the prior art involves multi-user environments having a large number of terminals or workstations which are generally part of a larger communication network. Usually these networks have been established to permit the users to interact with each other and with data maintained on the system. In this environment, a user at a terminal or workstation can send a message to one or more of the other users on the network concurrently, and is notified when the addressees have received and read the message. In most of these environments, each user generally maintains a calendar, and in many of these environments the reason for having a network in which users interact, quite often involves user interaction that requires reference to the respective electronic calendars of the users. A considerable amount of time is therefore spent by calendar users in many organizations, with people checking and rearranging their calendars to accommodate various events such as meetings and presentations.

Calendar systems have progressed to the point where a person who is calling a meeting can at least view the calendars of a number of users that he intends to invite to a meeting, in order to determine a common available time for the meeting. (U.S. Pat. No. 4,676,836 is an example of such a system.) In this prior art system, a screen is presented to the meeting originator which requests the data necessary for the system to determine times that all potential attendees would be available. The data requested includes, for example, the length of the meeting, a time period during which the meeting should be conducted, the place of the meeting and the names of the attendees. Based on this data, the method returns a screen of available times after inspecting each attendee's day calendar during the time period for free time slots or periods.

The originator then selects the beginning time and end time of the meeting, including the time and date, and invitations are automatically sent to all the attendees, requesting their attendance at the scheduled meeting.

While such an automatic system saves time in finding a convenient meeting time, relative to the manual process, the process is limited to the scheduling of meetings based on "free time" as represented by the absence of a calendar entry on each of the inspected calendars. This approach does not recognize that some calendar entries are less important than others and, in practice, it is often impossible to find a common period of "free time" for a meeting that involves a large group of people or a meeting involving a number of people whose work requires a large number of meetings.

These deficiencies of the prior art electronic calendaring methods, namely using only free time to find relevant calendar entries, are overcome by the invention disclosed and claimed in cross-referenced application Ser. No. 008,034 now U.S. Pat. No. 4,831,552.

In accordance with that invention, an electronic calendaring method is provided in which a calendar owner can request the system to display or print out a selected subset of calendar entries from a plurality of calendars maintained by the electronic calendaring system. The method assists the calendar owner in defining the selected subset by presenting to him a "view select" screen containing various prompts to which he responds by keying in the search criteria that he wishes to employ, to determine if a calendar entry belongs to the subset. The subset is then displayed in one or more composite screens. Since criteria other than free time may be employed in defining the selected subset, the "view select" function can be used to provide enhancements to functions such as the automatic scheduling of meetings.

As explained in detail in that application, calendared events that have a lower priority than the event being calendared can be included on the composite calendar so that an event that is calendared can be potentially displaced. If the system also allows a calendar owner to develop responses to invitations automatically based on pre-established criteria and data contained in the invitation, such as described in cross-referenced application Ser. No. 008,033 now U.S. Pat. No. 4,807,154 then it is quite permissible and acceptable for entries to be entered on an owners calendar in his absence.

Most workstations which are connected to a large system allow a calendar owner to make a copy of his calendar in machine readable form so that he can review and modify that copy at another terminal which may be at home or another location. Many individuals therefore make a machine readable copy of their calendar on a diskette which they carry with them when they are away from the office. If these individuals have portable type personal computers then it is a simple matter to update that copy as the need arises when they are away from the office.

While an individual is away from his office there are generally a number of entries that are made, if only on a tentative basis, to the system copy of the calendar. These may be made by an assistant or automatically or both depending on what the calendar owner has arranged to do when he is away from the system. The problem arises that on return to the office the entries on each copy must be reconciled on a manual basis by the calendar owner or an assistant which can sometimes result in a time consuming, error prone, tedious endeavor. The present invention avoids this problem by providing an automatic interactive reconciliation process.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

In accordance with the present invention an electronic calendar method is provided in which a calendar owner can automatically reconcile the entries within a designated time span that have been made independently on two different calendars. In a typical situation the owner obtains a machine readable copy of his calendar that he can update during a planned absence from his office. This copy will be referred to as the personal copy of the calendar while the calendar maintained by the host is referred to as the system copy. During the planned absence his system calendar continues to be updated either by an assistant or automatically by the system. The owner also updates his personal copy by means of his portable computer. On return to the office, the entries on the two calendars are reconciled automatically in accordance with the method of the present invention.

In the preferred embodiment, calendar entries for the electronic calendaring system have predefined categories. In making a calendar entry on the system an owner is presented with a screen which assists in the creation of a calendar entry by requesting certain information which is stored by the system in established data structures. Each entry is assigned a unique ID number and is also time stamped with the time at which the entry is made. The time stamp of an entry should not be confused with the time slot in the calendar where the entry is placed.

In reconciling the entries between the host copy and the personal copy the owner designates one of the copies as the master which will, at the end of the reconciling process, represent that owners current calendar. Generally the host copy is designated the master. The owner must also specify the time span over which the reconciling process should take place. Generally the time span will start at the time the personal copy was made which is recorded on the personal copy and end about the time the reconciling process is started.

The reconcile process takes into consideration the various actions that can be taken relative to the master copy and the personal copy. The following actions are permitted by the electronic calendaring method:

1. Create a new calendar entry on either copy

2. Delete an existing calendar entry on either copy

3. Change the time slot to which a calendar entry is assigned

4. Modify the content of an entry but not the ID

The logic of the reconciling process is to first identify the old entries and the new entries. Old entries by definition are entries having a time stamp prior to the time the personal copy was made. New entries by definition are entries made after the time the copy was made and therefore have time stamps which are subsequent to the time the personal copy was made. Old entries that have not been altered in any manner are identified since these will not be changed on the master copy. Each remaining pair of old entries therefore has had one entry one one of the copies either modified or deleted. If an old entry has been deleted on the personal copy it can be assumed that it was intentionally deleted by the owner and therefore that entry is deleted on the system copy. In order for an entry to be deleted from the system copy, the originator of the entry must initiate it, which in the case of meeting type entries may be some other calendar owner on the system. If that is the case, then the reconciling process assumes that is has been correctly deleted and the entry on the personal copy is ignored. The calendar owner is given the option at the time he requests the reconciling operation as to whether entries that are under his control and that were deleted by an assistant should be presented to him for review or should be permanently deleted.

The last set of old entries to be considered are those entries which were modified. By definition a modified old entry pair will have the same IDs and time slots on each copy but the time stamps of the entries will be different. Only two conditions can exist. The first is that one time stamp is prior to the time the copy was made. The second condition is that both time stamps are subsequent to the time the copy was made but since the IDs and time slots were the same the entries were correctly identified as old entries. In the first condition the entry with the time stamp that is subsequent to the copy time prevails and is transferred to the master copy if it is not on the master copy.

The second condition in which both entries have been modified is taken care of by doing a comparison of the various data in each entry to insure that a conflict really exists since it is possible that both entries were updated with the same information at different times in which case there is really no need to take any action on the master copy. If the comparison operation on the data indicates that there are differences but they are not necessarily inconsistent then the data is combined in the entry on the master calendar. An example of a difference that could be considered as not being inconsistent is data in a comment field of a data structure associated with one entry and not in the other entry.

In the event a valid inconsistency is detected both entries are flagged for presentation to the owner for conflict resolution.

The new entries on each copy within the specified time span will be definition have a unique time stamp which is subsequent to the time the copy of the calendar was made. Each new entry on the personal copy is therefore transferred to the master copy at the corresponding time slot. If the time slot is taken by another entry a conflict exists and the entries are flagged for presentation to the calendar owner.

New entries on each copy which were modified present no problem since only one copy of the modified entry exists and it is treated basically as an unmodified new entry. A new entry on the personal copy that was deleted is ignored since it is assumed it was deleted intentionally by the owner. New entries on the master copy that were deleted are treated in the same manner that old deleted entries were treated. Deleted entries under control of other calendar owners are assumed to have been deleted correctly. Deleted entries under the control of the calendar owner are either treated as deleted or presented to the owner, at his option, to ratify or veto the prior deletion.

It is therefore an object of the present invention to provide an improved electronic calendaring method.

A further object of the present invention is to provide an electronic calendaring method in which calendar entries on two different copies of the same calendar can be automatically reconciled.

A still further object of the present invention is to provide an improved electronic calendaring method in which a calendar owner can reconcile independently made calendar entries on two different copies of his calendar.

Another object of the present invention is to provide an electronic calendaring method in which a calendar owner can take a machine readable copy of his calendar that can be updated independently of the original calendar for a period of time and then is assisted in reconciling the entries from both calendars.

Objects and advantages other than those mentioned above will become apparent from the following description when read in connection with the drawing.

DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 illustrates an interactive workstation in which the method of the present invention may be advantageously employed.

FIG. 2 illustrates a network of interactive workstations of the type shown in FIG. 1.

FIGS. 3a-3c illustrate screens which are employed by the users in calendaring an event.

FIG. 4 illustrates a screen which is employed by a calendar owner to assist in reconciling two different copies of the same calendar for a given time period.

FIG. 5 is a flow chart, illustrating the detailed steps of the method of the present invention.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENT:

FIG. 1 illustrates the functional components of an interactive type data processing terminal on which the electronic calendaring method of the present invention may be advantageously employed. The terminal comprises a processing unit 11 which includes a microprocessor block 12, a semiconductor memory 13, and a control block 14 which functions to control input/output operations in addition to the interaction between the micro processor block 12 and the memory unit 13.

The terminal further includes a group of conventional peripheral units including a display device 16, a keyboard 17, a printer 18, a disk storage unit 19, and a modem 20. 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 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 calendaring method.

Processing unit 11 corresponds to the "system unit" of a personal computer system such as the IBM XT or IBM AT type systems. Unit 11 is provided with an operating system program which may be one of the many versions of DOS (Disk Operating System) which is normally employed to run the systems. The operating system program is stored in memory 13 along with one or more application programs that the user has selected to run. Depending on the capacity of memory 13 and the size of the application programs, portions of these programs, as needed, may be transferred to memory 13 from the disk storage unit 19 which may include, for example, a 30 megabyte hard disk drive and a diskette drive. The basic function 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 13 when needed. The function of the diskette drive is to provide a removable storage function for entering programs and data into the system, and a vehicle for storing data in a form that is readily transportable for use on other terminals or systems.

Display device 16 and keyboard 17 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 substantionally 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. 1 further includes a printer 18, which functions to provide hard copy output of data developed or stored in the terminal. Lastly, the modem 20 functions to transfer data from the terminal of FIG. 1 to a host system through one or more communication links which may be a commercial type link or a dedicated communication link.

FIG. 2 illustrates a network 21 of interactive type workstations of the type shown in FIG. 1. As illustrated, the network includes a plurality of terminals which are interconnected with each other and to a host central processing unit 23, which in turn is connected via communication link 24 to a second host processing unit 25, which also connects to another network 26 of interactive workstations. Functionally, the system operates to allow one terminal to communicate to one or more other terminals using established communication protocols, so that the various serially connected communication links are transparent to the operator. Such systems are well known in the art, and are currently in extensive commercial use. Since these communication links per se are not part of the present invention, only those details that are necessary for an understanding of the calendaring 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 calendar owners and shareable resources such as meeting rooms, etc., which require scheduling.

The system shown in FIG. 2 processes information as various types of data objects such as text data objects, graphic data objects, and calendar data objects. Each of these data objects are represented by a datastream which comprises a series of structured fields.

A calendar object datastream has the following sequence of structures.

Begin Document (BDT)

Begin Page (BPG)

Begin Calendar Data (BCL)

Calendar Data Descriptor (CDD) (Optional)

Calendar Data SF (CAD)

Calendar Structures (COCA)

End Calendar Data (ECL)

End Page (EPG)

End Document (EDT)

The format of the datastream for other data objects contain the begin document, begin page, end page, and end document data structures. Structured fields corresponding to those listed above for a calendar object are also employed for other type objects.

A structured field is a self-describing entity which contains related groupings of parameter values and triplets. The structure field, as shown below, has two parts: the Structured Field Introducer and the Structured Field Content. ##STR1##

The structured field begins with a Structured Field Introducer. the syntax and semantics of the Structured Field Introducer are defined by the architecture which governs the datastream in which the structured field is found. The Structured Field Introducer contains as the first two bytes a parameter which defines the length of the structured field. It also contains an identification code which uniquely identifies the structured field.

The Structure Content portion of each structured field contains structures and triplets, which give the structured field its meaning. Parameters in the triplets define the attributes of the Calendar Object. Every parameter has a value either explicitly appearing in a triplet, inherited from a control structure in the datastream's hierarchy, or implicitly defined as a default. This default may also be the alternate action value.

Every structure is either required or optional. A required structure appears in the object because the function of that structure is required and for proper performance of the function an actual value is necessary.

An optional structure need not appear in the object either because the function of that structure is not required or because the function is required, but default values are acceptable for all parameters.

As shown above, a calendar data (CAD) structured field (SF) precedes the actual calendar data. A calendar data descriptor (CDD) SF can precede the CAD SF to provide formatting information for the data that follows.

Calendar data comprises named data structures and named triplets which are composed of parameters. A parameter is a variable to which a value is assigned. Parameters can be optional or required. Parameters are also classified as terminal or non-terminal. A terminal parameter is merely the last parameter in a string of parameters.

A parameter can have one of three types of values assigned.

1. NUM - This is a number or a numerical value.

2. COD - This is a code assigned a specific meaning.

3. BST- This is a bit string of binary elements, each of which is usually independent of the other.

In the following discussion it will be assumed that a byte comprises 8 bit positions numbered 0-7 from left to right, with position 0 being the high order position. Bit position 0 represents 2**7 (2 to the 7th power), while bit 7 represents 2**0 (2 to the 0 power).

The various calendar structured fields and calendar triplets are defined by the following type of table.

______________________________________ BYTES NAME TYPE MIN MAX LGTH OPT ______________________________________ n-m name type v x www ______________________________________

In the figure:

BYTES refers to the position, indexed on zero.

NAME is the name by which reference is made to the parameter.

TYPE denotes the syntax of the parameter by "type," The architected types NUM, COD, and BST were described earlier.

LGTH denotes the length of the field in terms of the exact number of bytes or the maximum number of bytes permitted.

OPT refers to the optionality of the parameter's appearance in the structure or triplet:

O means that the parameter is optional.

R means that the parameter's appearance is required.

If a required parameter is missing, an exception condition exists. The alternate action is to ignore the structure, self-defining field, or triplet to which the missing parameter belongs.

Syntactically descriptive material below the figure indicates what additional restrictions apply to the structure or triplet defined by the figure.

Calendar structures and calendar triplets employed for the various event types which are calendared and other structures which are relevant to the present invention will be described using the above-described format. After the structures are described, the display screens that are presented to calendar owners by the system in order to solicit information when a calendar owner wants to perform a calendaring function will be described. A flow chart setting forth the detailed steps of the method of the present invention will then be described that will assist persons skilled in programming interactive terminals to implement the method of the present invention.

In the preferred embodiment, calendar entries are classified into a number of different types. Since the invention contemplates interchanging calendar data throughout the system, including terminals that are remotely connected, such as those shown in FIG. 2, entry types and presentation language are controlled by a defined architecture.

While the same display screen may be employed to solicit the data for a number of different event types, the data structures and triplets, required or optional, will vary by event type.

While some of the structures to be described and the triplets associated with these structures are not directly involved in the present invention, they have been described in order the provide background for the reader and a basis for a comprehensive understanding of the claimed process and its relationship to the processes described and claimed in the cross-referenced applications.

The various calendar object data structures to be described are preceded by a calendar data structure shown below.

__________________________________________________________________________ CALENDAR DATA (CAD) STRUCTURE FIELD (SF) BYTES NAME TYPE MIN MAX LGTH OPT __________________________________________________________________________ 0-1 Structured Field Length NUM 8 32767 2 R 2 Structured Field Type1 COD X'D3' X'D3' 1 R 3 Structured Field Type2 COD X'EE' X'EE' 1 R 4 Structured Field Type3 COD X'5B' X'5B' 1 R 5 Flags BST 0 0 1 R 6-7 Segment Sequence Number NUM 0 32767 2 R 8-7+n Calendar Data * * n R __________________________________________________________________________ *Values depend on the Calendar Object structure and triplet specification

The Calendar Data SF (CAD) identifies the data as calendar data and specified the length of the calendar data. The Calendar Data SF contains, for example, up to 32767 bytes of calendar structures and calendar triplets (called "Calendar Data"). Calendar data varies with the function employed by the generator of the