United States Patent [19]
`Baker
`
`11111111111111111 IIII IIII IIIII IUI llll llll llll 111111111111111
`US005715416A
`Patent Number:
`Date of Patent:
`
`[11]
`
`[45]
`
`5,715,416
`Feb.3, 1998
`
`[54] USER DEFINABLE PICTORIAL INTERFACE
`FOR A ACCESSING INFORMATION IN AN
`ELECTRONIC FILE SYSTEM
`
`[76]
`
`Inventor: Michelle Baker, 325 River Drive #123,
`New York. N.Y. 10025
`
`[21] Appl. No.: 316,518
`
`Sep. 30, 1994
`
`[22] Filed:
`Int. CL 6
`........................................................ GD6F 3/14
`[51]
`[52] U.S. Cl . ............................................. 395/349; 395/335
`[58] Field of Search ..................................... 395/155-161,
`395/153, 154. 135,348,349,350,351,
`346,356,357,335,977,968,806,807;
`345/113, 115, 121, 122
`
`[56]
`
`References Cited
`
`U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS
`
`4,601,003
`5,021,976
`5,241,671
`5,347,628
`5,349,658
`5,361,173
`5,394,521
`5,442,736
`5,479,602
`5,524,195
`
`7/1986 Yoneyama et al ...................... 395/351
`6/1991 Wexelblat et al ....................... 395/356
`8/1993 Reed et al. .......................... 395/346 X
`9/1994 Brewer et al ........................... 395/351
`9/1994 O'Rourke et al ....................... 395/349
`11/1994 Ishii et al. ................................. 3(J)n.7
`2/1995 Henderson, Jr. et al .............. 395/346
`8/1995 Cummins ............................ 395/135 X
`12/1995 Baecker et al .......................... 395/349
`6/1996 Clanton, ill et al ................ 395/348 X
`
`OTHER PUBLICATIONS
`
`"User Interface Technique for Selecting Multiple Interface
`Themes", IBM Technical Disclosure Bulletin, vol. 37, No. 3,
`Mar. 1994, pp. 635-638.
`Tonomura et al., "Content Oriented Visual Interface Using
`Video Icons for Visual Database Systems", Visual Lan(cid:173)
`guages, 1989 IEEE workshop, pp. 68-73.
`Smoliaar et al., "Interacting with Digital Video," Tencon
`'94-1994 IEEE Region 10 Conference on Frontiers of ...
`, pp. 852-S56.
`Ohnishi, "A Visual Software REquirements Definition
`Method", Requirements Engineering, 1994 1st International
`Conference, pp. 194-201.
`
`"Adaptive Navigational Tools for Educational Hyperme(cid:173)
`dia", by de La Passardiere; Wolfville, NS. Canada Jun.
`17-20, 1992.pp. 555-567.
`"MICROCOSM: An Open Model for Hypermedia! with
`Dynamic Linking", by Fountain, et al .• Versailles. France.
`Nov. 27-30. 1990, pp. 298-311.
`'"The World Wide Web", by Berners-Lee, et al .. Communi(cid:173)
`cations of the ACM.Aug. 1984. vol. 37, No. 8.pp.76, 77-82.
`"Demonstration of an Interactive Multimedia Enviom(cid:173)
`ment". Rich et al .• IEEE. Dec. 1994, pp. 15-22.
`
`(List continued on next page.)
`
`Primary &aminer-Raymond J. Bayerl
`Assistant Examiner--Crescelle N. dela Torre
`Attorney. Agent, or Finn-David P. Gordon
`ABSTRACT
`
`[57]
`
`A pictorial user interface for accessing information in an
`electronic file system provides a pictorial image which is
`linked to a file directory and which identifies the file
`directory. Objects in the pictorial image are icons linked to
`file objects and an animated character is overlaid on the
`pictorial image. User input causes movement of the ani(cid:173)
`mated character relative to the pictorial image. Input from
`the user is preferably through a limited input device such as
`a gamepad controller, a mouse, or by using a limited number
`of keys on a normal keyboard. Input signals are mapped
`according to keycode identical command sets. context argu(cid:173)
`ments and selection arguments. Commands that can be
`invoked by the user include operating system commands.
`pictorial object commands, and interface utility commands.
`Using the pictorial object commands, the user can configure
`the interface so that different pictures and icons are associ(cid:173)
`ated with different directories and files. Commands are
`executed with a prologue animation and an epilogue anima(cid:173)
`tion. The prologue animation provides feedback as to the
`nature of the command being executed. The epilogue ani(cid:173)
`mation provides feedback as to the results of the command.
`Animations may include actions of the animated character or
`the behaviour of a selected icon. or both. The interface may
`be applied as an overlay to virtually any operating system.
`
`11 Claims, 18 Drawing Sheets
`
`~
`
`11
`
`10
`
`:
`
`: ,~ . . { ' · , .. \
`
`/'~"-,,.,c, ';t:j.";/ °' - - - - - -";._ - - - - I
`i"1· ,P.t/1 t.
`~ \ :··
`\ \
`,., (.f • ')t' ' , . I \,
`\ ll
`
`r:~~\. \ 22
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 1
`
`

`

`5,715,416
`Page 2
`
`OTHER PUBLICATIONS
`
`"Bob: Your New Best Friend's Personality Quirks", by
`Manes, New York Times, Jan. 17. 1995.
`"Experiences with the Alternate Reality Kit, An Example of
`the Tension Between Literalism and Magic", Smith, 1987,
`pp. 61-67.
`"A Multiple, Virtual-Workspace Interface to Support User
`Task Switching", Card et al., Intelligent Systems Laborato(cid:173)
`ries, 1987, pp. 53-59.
`"Cone Trees: Animated 3D Visualizations of Hierarchical
`Information", Robertson, et al., Xerox Palo Alto Research
`Center, 1991, pp. 189-194.
`'The Streams of a Story", Miller, Apple Computer, 1992, p.
`676.
`'The Virtual Museum", Applin et al., Apple Computer,
`1992, p. 676.
`"Multidimensional Icons", Henry et al., ACM Transactions
`in Graphics, vol. 9, No. 1, Jan. 1990, pp. 133-137.
`"Bringing Icons to Life", Baecker, et al., CHI '91, Confer(cid:173)
`ence Proceedings, New Orleans, LA, Apr. 27-May 2, 1991,
`pp. 1-6.
`
`'The Information Visualizer, An Information Workspace",
`Card et al., cm '91, Conference Proceedings, New Orleans,
`LA, Apr. 27-May 2, 1991, pp. 181-188.
`
`"COAS: Combined Object-Action Selection: A Human Fac(cid:173)
`tors Experiment", Kelly et al., IBM Research Division, RC
`17796 Feb. 25, 1992, pp. 1-13.
`
`''Rooms: The Use of Multiple Virtual Workspaces to Reduce
`Space Contention in a Window-Based Graphical User Inter(cid:173)
`face", Henderson. Jr. et al., ACM Transactions on Graphics,
`vol. 5, No. 3, Jul. 1986, pp. 211-243.
`
`'The Geographic Interface Puts the World on the Desktop",
`Fisher, New York Times, Feb. 5, 1995.
`
`"An Animated On-Line Community with Artificial Agents",
`Rich et al., IEEE MultiMedia, Winter 1994.
`
`"Interface Invaders", Wtlder. Information Week, p. 78, Jul.
`18, 1994.
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 2
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.3, 1998
`
`Sheet 1 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`FIG. 1
`
`16
`
`10
`
`·-··
`1·.....;
`
`J; ,::::':,,,~'.}~-i •" Y(
`
`.:'.r,.
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 3
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 3, 1998
`
`Sheet 2 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`FIG. 1a
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 4
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 3, 1998
`
`Sheet 3 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`FIG. 2a
`
`FIG. 2
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 5
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.3, 1998
`
`Sheet 4 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`12
`
`10
`
`FIG. 3
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 6
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 3, 1998
`
`Sheet 5 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`10
`
`FIG. 3a
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 7
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.3, 1998
`
`Sheet 6 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`10
`
`FIG. 3b
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 8
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.3, 1998
`
`Sheet 7 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`10
`
`22
`
`FIG. 3c
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 9
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.3, 1998
`
`Sheet 8 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`SOUTH
`
`NOR~
`LEFT
`
`/
`
`EAST
`
`LEFT
`
`LEFT
`
`LEFT
`
`LEFT
`
`NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST
`
`RIGHT
`
`FIG. 3d
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 10
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.3, 1998
`
`Sheet 9 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`FIG. 3e
`
`I
`
`r-- 62a
`
`62b
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 11
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.3, 1998
`
`Sheet 10 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`FIG. 3f
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 12
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 3, 1998
`
`Sheet 11 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`3
`
`22
`
`8
`
`22
`
`FIG. 4
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 13
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 3, 1998
`
`Sheet 12 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`FIG. 4a
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 14
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 3, 1998
`
`Sheet 13 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`FIG. 4b
`
`1 .
`
`3
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 15
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.3, 1998
`
`Sheet 14 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`FIG. 4c
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`7
`
`9
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 16
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 3, 1998
`
`Sheet 15 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`22
`
`2
`
`22
`
`FIG. 4d
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 17
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb.3, 1998
`
`Sheet 16 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`FIG. 5
`I
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 18
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 3, 1998
`
`Sheet 17 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`FIG. 5a
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 19
`
`

`

`U.S. Patent
`
`Feb. 3, 1998
`
`Sheet 18 of 18
`
`5,715,416
`
`3
`
`6
`
`9
`
`4
`
`7
`
`5
`
`8
`
`FIG. 6
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 20
`
`

`

`1
`USER DEFINABLE PICTORIAL INTERFACE
`FOR A ACCESSING INFORMATION IN AN
`ELECTRONIC FILE SYSTEM
`
`5,715,416
`
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
`1. Field of the Invention
`The invention relates to a graphical user interface for
`accessing information stored in a computer. More
`particularly, the invention relates to a user definable graphi(cid:173)
`cal interface for a computer operating system which utilizes
`pictorial information and animation as well as sound.
`2. State of the Art
`Very early computers were provided with a minimal
`interface which often consisted of little more than switches
`and lights. Rows of switches were set in positions repre(cid:173)
`senting binary numbers to provide input and rows of lights
`were illuminated representing binary numbers to provide
`output Eventually, computer input and output included text
`and decimal numbers, which were input using punch cards
`and output using line printers. A major advance in comput(cid:173)
`ing was the interactive video display terminal (VDT). Early
`VDTs displayed several lines of alphanumeric characters
`and received input from a "QWERfY'' keyboard. VDTs
`were a great improvement over switches and lights and even
`over punch cards and line printers.
`As computers became more complex, it became necessary
`to systematize the manner in which information was stored
`and retrieved. The hierarchical file system was developed
`and is still substantially the only system in use today with a
`few exceptions. Under the hierarchical file system, informa(cid:173)
`tion is stored in files and files are stored in directories.
`Directories may be stored in other directories and called
`sub-directories. Using this system. any file can be located by
`using a path name which identifies the path from a root
`directory through one or more subdirectories to the file; e.g.,
`a typical path name may take the form: ''rootdirectory/
`directory/subdirectory/filename".
`In addition to the development of the hierarchical file
`system was the development of various "operating systems".
`The early computers did not require an "operating system"
`per se. They were manually programmed to perform a single
`task and then reprogrammed for a different task. Programs
`were stored on punch cards or tape and were loaded directly
`into the computer's random access memory (RAM) indi(cid:173)
`vidually when needed by a system operator. With the devel(cid:173)
`opment of various file systems, including the hierarchical
`file system, various programs and data could be stored on the
`same medium and selected for loading into the computer's
`random access memory (RAM). An operating system is a
`program which is used to access information on a storage
`medium and load it into RAM. The operating system allows
`~e computer user to display the contents of directories and
`choose programs to be run and data to be manipulated from 55
`the contents of the directories. Every operating system,
`therefore, has a user interface, i.e. a manner of accepting
`input from a user and a manner of displaying output to a
`user. The input typically includes commands to the operating
`system to find information in directories, to display the
`contents of directories, to select files in directories for
`execution by the computer, etc. In addition, operating sys(cid:173)
`tems provide means for the user to operate on files by
`moving them. deleting them, copying them, etc. Output from
`the operating system typically includes displays of the 65
`contents of directories, displays of the contents of files, error
`messages when a comm.and cannot be completed, confir-
`
`2
`mation messages when a command has been completed. etc.
`With many operating systems. when a program is selected
`for execution through the operating system. the selected
`program takes over control of the computer and returns
`5 control to the operating system when the program is ended.
`Modem operating systems share control with programs and
`several programs can run while the operating system is
`running.
`The most primitive operating system interface is known
`10 as a "comm.and line interface". While this type of interface
`is not necessarily indicative of a primitive operating system,
`it is primitive as an interface. The command line interface is
`purely text and presents the user with an arbitrary "prompt"
`such as "C:\" or"%/:". The only information conveyed to the
`15 user by the command line prompt is that the operating
`system is ready to receive a command, and in the case of
`"C:\", that the operating system will perform commands
`with reference to the currently selected root directory "C".
`The commands to which the operating system will respond
`20 are most often obscure abbreviations like DIR to display the
`contents of the currently selected directory and CD to select
`a different directory. Moreover, the responses provided by
`the operating system interface to commands such as DIR
`may be equally obscure such as displaying a rapidly scroll-
`25 ing list of directory contents or the cryptic "Abort. Retry,
`Fail" message. Thus, in order to explore the contents of a file
`system using a command line interface, the user must
`repeatedly type DIR and CD and try to remember how the
`scrolling lists of filenames relate to each other in the
`30 hierarchy of the file system. Most users find this to be a
`tedious and trying experience.
`More recently, the command line interface has been
`abandoned in favor of a fully graphical user interface
`("GlJr') such as those provided by the Apple Macintosh
`35 operating system and the IBM OS/2 operating system. To
`date, GUI interfaces to the operating system have been
`"WIMP" interfaces; that is they use Windows, Icons, Menus,
`and Pointers. In the development of WIMP interfaces, a
`central issue has been the organii.ation of information for
`40 display on a the limited viewspace provided by a computer
`monitor. This issue has been addressed by using the meta(cid:173)
`phor of a messy desk.top to guide the design and layout of
`information on the graphical display. The metaphor of a
`messy desktop, which arose in the research on Rooms, and
`45 more recently 3-D Rooms. has become universal as an
`organizing paradigm for the display of user interactions with
`a computer operating system. In addition to the Macintosh
`and OS/2 operating systems interfaces, Unix systems
`X-windows, Microsoft Windows, and others are based on
`50 this metaphor. In a WIMP interface, windows are used to
`demarcate regions of the display assigned to individual
`programs, graphical icons are used to represent objects such
`as files and directories known to the operating system,
`menus can be displayed to list text string names of available
`operations, and a pointing cursor is used to select object
`icons or menu items that are visible on the display.
`Graphical layouts provided by movable windows. icons.
`and menus of the WIMP interface have been very successful
`in helping to organize information, particularly data from
`60 alternative programs in progress. on a computer display.
`Nevertheless, they are ofl'er limited functionality for depic(cid:173)
`tion of operating system procedures and for graphical infor(cid:173)
`mation about the files and directories present in the file
`system. Most computer users find the graphical interface to
`be much easier to learn and much easier to use than the
`command line interface. Many people have described the
`graphical interface as "intuitive". However. some people do
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 21
`
`

`

`5,715,416
`
`3
`not find it so intuitive and need more time to learn how to
`use it than do others.
`Despite their vastly enhanced use compared to command
`line interfaces, the graphical interlaces presently used for
`access to operating system functionality are still somewhat
`regimented. For example, the icons are typically all rectan(cid:173)
`gular and of the same size, e.g. 32 by 32 pixels. They are also
`generally generic. That is to say. for example, that a docu(cid:173)
`ment concerning the subject of elephants would have the
`same icon as a document concerning the subject of roses.
`Typically. all of the directory icons are identical graphics of
`a folder with no graphical indication of what the folders
`contain either in subject matter or in amount of information.
`A folder containing one file has the same size and shape icon
`as a folder containing twenty files. Thus file and folder icons
`must always be accompanied by a text string for identifica(cid:173)
`tion. Moreover, all the windows drawn in the GUI are
`identical except for the text string which typically appears in
`the window's title bar. Thus there is no graphical informa(cid:173)
`tion presented to inform the user what directory is being
`viewed. The user must read the title bar and remember the
`association between the text string and the directory contents
`to determine what directory is being viewed.
`There have been a number of extensions to the early
`WIMP interlaces to improve the ability of users to associate
`icons to meaningful objects or actions. It is possible for the
`user to customize icons. by cutting and pasting graphics or
`by drawing an icon with an icon editor. However, the
`process is often tedious and the result is not always infor(cid:173)
`mative. The only icon editing software presently available
`which automatically enhances the informative nature of an
`icon are the programs which create thumbnail graphic icons
`for graphic files. With these programs, a file which contains
`a picture of an elephant, for example. will be provided with
`an icon which is a miniature version of the elephant picture.
`Since these programs do not apply to files made up of text
`or for executable program, they do not provide a general
`solution to the problem of indistinguishable graphic icons.
`Even for software application developers it is becoming
`increasingly difficult to design meaningful graphical icons
`that satisfy the constraints imposed by existing WIMP
`interlaces and that are different from those already in use.
`One approach to the problem of designing meaningful
`graphics for icons has been to work with animated and
`multidimensional icons. It is believed that animations can be
`used to improve the expressiveness and extend the amount
`of information that can be conveyed in an icon. Some of this
`research has been incorporated into existing operating sys(cid:173)
`tem interlaces, particularly for generic process depiction.
`For example, when an operation on a file is perlormed or a
`program is opened, the mouse pointer may become momen(cid:173)
`tarily animated or may assume a different graphic, e.g. by
`displaying an hourglass. However. there are serious limita(cid:173)
`tions on the use of animated icons in current operating
`systems interlaces. Ftrst, they are only possible for cursor
`animations. It is not currently possible, even for application
`developers. to supply animated icons for file objects because
`existing operating system interlaces do not provide support
`for such icons. Second, cursor animations are constructed by
`operating system developers and fixed in the operating
`system. Software developers can make use of alternative
`cursor animations but they must select a cursor animation
`from the small set of choices that are included with the
`operating system. The set of animated icons is fixed and
`finite.
`Another regimented aspect of the current graphical inter(cid:173)
`faces is that they are relatively static. With a few exceptions,
`
`20
`
`4
`such as the animated cursors described above or the zoom(cid:173)
`ing open of windows. the graphical display is inanimate.
`While the operating system interlace presents a static
`graphical representation of objects such as files and
`5 directories. there is not much graphical representation of
`processes performed by the operating system. Thus. as the
`user initiates a process ( such as copying a file or launching
`a program, etc.) there is no intuitive indication by the
`operating system to the user as to what is happening. For
`10 example, the hourglass animation of the mouse cursor may
`indicate that the operating system or program is performing
`some function but there is no indication of what that function
`is. Moreover, even animations such as the hourglass or
`zooming of windows that are indicative of processes, cannot
`15 be used for graphical display of interactions with the rep(cid:173)
`resentations of objects such as files and directories known to
`the operating system. 11tis is another result of the fact that
`animations displayed by the operating system interlace must
`be constructed in advance by software developers.
`Another difficulty with WIMP interlaces for the operating
`system arises in the use of menus for the selection and
`execution of most operating system commands. For many
`users, this is an improvement over the old command line
`interlaces in which a usc!r had to remember the correct text
`25 string identifier and avoiid typing or spelling errors in order
`to invoke a command. However, the need to traverse menus
`in order to locate the coD"ect mouse responsive text string for
`a command is a nuisance for many computer users. It
`generally requires that the mouse pointer be moved away
`30 from the workspace and that a number of hierarchically
`organized lists be scanned for the desired command.
`Although accelerator key sequences are normally available
`for command selection. most computer users find them
`difficult to learn and use. This is because they normally
`35 require that a control key be used in conjunction with
`another key. A user is forced to remove the hand from the
`mouse to press keys, an action that tends to disrupt the
`orientation of the mouse pointer and require recalibration of
`hand and eye in order to resume work with the mouse.
`Recently, software ck:velopers have created application
`programs that allow a user to configure an alternative
`desktop interlace to the ones provided by standard operating
`systems. These programs extend the underlying representa(cid:173)
`tion of an icon and allow icon graphics to be different sizes
`45 and shapes from the standard 32 by 32 pixel icons available
`in the usual operating system interlace. They do this by
`requiring that users select icons from a large set provided by
`the interlace developers. Edmark's KidDesk is an example
`of such a program that extends the desktop metaphor for use
`so by young children. The software can be set up to provide
`young children with aca!ss to a small set of programs. Like
`windows-based software for adults, it is limited to a single
`graphical view, and a set of predesignated icons.
`The handling of user interaction with and display of the
`55 files and directories that .make up the computer's file system
`is a central function of any operating system interface. As
`noted earlier, command line interfaces which required a user
`to repeatedly invoke a se:quence of commands like DIR and
`CD in order to examine the file system have been particu-
`60 larly difficult for users. Since it is so difficult and time
`consuming to navigate a file system using a command line
`interface, file system management programs were developed
`for hierarchical files systems. Most of these programs
`include a quasi-graphicid representation of the file system
`65 "tree" so that the user can see at once (or in a few screens)
`how directories, subdire1:tories and files are organized rela(cid:173)
`tive to each other. File system management programs
`
`40
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 22
`
`

`

`5,715,416
`
`5
`improve on the bare command line interface by continuously
`displaying command menus and/or file lists. The interface
`provided by these programs, however, is mainly text based.
`The user is forced to read listed information. With the
`exception of the actual text, all files and directories look the
`same, i.e. a line of text. Only the relative location of the lines
`of text in the hierarchical tree gives a clue as to how the files
`and directories are related.
`WIMP interfaces for the operating system allow for
`improvements in the earlier file system management pro(cid:173)
`grams by enabling the use of separate windows for the
`display of directory contents and allowing some files to be
`executable when they are clicked on with a pointing device.
`In the Apple Macintosh, file system management is included
`as part of the operating system while Microsoft Windows 15
`and IBM's OS/2 include a similar File Manager program
`along with the basic operating system. In each of these
`systems, the user can explore and navigate through the file
`system by pointing and clicking on icons with the aid of a
`mouse or other pointing device. For example, in order to 20
`view the contents of a disk, the user would locate the mouse
`pointer on the icon of the disk and click the mouse button
`twice.
`In the Macintosh, which offers the greatest functionality
`in file system management, the interface responds to mouse 25
`clicks by opening a window which contains icons represent(cid:173)
`ing directories and files contained on the disk. Beneath, or
`alongside, each icon is the name of the file or directory.
`When displayed in one mode, each icon resides on a line
`followed by the name of the file, the size of the file, the date 30
`it was modified, etc. By simply pointing and clicking the
`mouse, the user can rearrange the icon display
`alphabetically, chronologically, by size, etc. The icons
`remain visible on the saeen until the user closes the window
`with an appropriate mouse click. If there are more icons than 35
`can be displayed on the saeen, the window contents can be
`scrolled horizontally and vertically. This is much more
`useful than the directory list in a command line interface
`which scrolls quickly off the saeen and cannot be scrolled
`backwards. Moreover, each of the directory icons will 40
`appear to respond to mouse clicks by displaying their
`contents either in another window, or in a hierarchical tree
`within the same window. Depending on the size of the
`display screen, the user may view the contents of several
`directories side by side. Files and directories can be moved 45
`or copied by clicking on their icons and dragging them onto
`the icon of the directory or disk to which they are to be
`copied or moved. This is much more convenient than typing
`directory 1 \subdirectory 1 \file name
`"copy
`directory2\subdirectory2\filename" to copy a file. Moreover, 50
`several icons can be selected by the mouse and dragged as
`a group to a new location. Files, groups of files, and entire
`directories are deleted by dragging them to a graphic icon
`that depicts a trash can. Files and/or groups of files can be
`opened, or programs executed, by clicking with the mouse. 55
`Some program icons may be responsive to "drag and drop"
`operations so that if a file icon is dropped onto the program
`icon, the program will perform some operation on the file.
`Improvements in usability of WIMP based interfaces to
`the file system are mainly a result of the fact that better use 60
`is made of the computer monitor "real estate" to organize
`and display information about the relationships among
`directories and files. with these interfaces, computer users
`are able to view the file system structure in a few screens or
`windows. When necessary, the use of a pointing device 65
`makes it easy to switch among these windows to refresh
`one's memory and develop a complete mental picture of the
`
`6
`file system structure. Because the capacity of storage devices
`such as hard disks and CD-ROMs is increasing and net(cid:173)
`worked file systems are becoming prevalent, existing inter(cid:173)
`faces for file management are not able to effectively aid
`5 users attempting to manage or browse the enormous num(cid:173)
`bers of files now available to them. Very large numbers of
`windows must be opened to traverse a large file system and
`displays of directory trees have begun to require many
`screenfuls of text. When this is the case, graphical displays
`10 of the file system begin to resemble the old command line
`interfaces because it is no longer possible for a user to
`examine the file system structure in a small number of
`views.
`There has recently been a great deal of research focused
`on improving the ability of users to organize. browse, and
`retrieve files from very large file systems. Advances in
`computer processing power and computer graphics have
`enabled the development of software tools that attempt to
`utilize the capacity of the human visual system for rapid
`processing of large volumes of information. Views, visual
`abstractions, and other information visualization techniques
`have been applied to the problem of finding and organizing
`files in a computer file system. For example, Cone Trees
`increase the amount of-information (e.g. the number of files
`displayed) by extending diagrams similar to those provided
`by existing file management programs into three dimensions
`and adding animation (e.g. rotation of the trees). These
`techniques are based on the use of overviews and visual
`abstraction of directory structure. They may be useful for
`navigating a file system structure in which the files are either
`already known to the user or are easily describable by text
`string names. They do not offer much help to a user
`exploring unknown file systems such as would be found on
`a network because text string names are generally inad(cid:173)
`equate as descriptions of file or directory contents.
`Abstraction oriented methods work by removing cues that
`are not directly relevant ( e.g. by displaying only the struc(cid:173)
`ture of a file system). For these tools, operating system
`limitations on graphic icons described earlier are not a
`problem because small generic icons and/or text strings are
`the preferred representation for file system objects. A dif-
`ferent approach to the problem users have locating and
`identifying files in a computer file system is to support the
`human proficiency in using unusual features of phenomenon
`to index and retrieve information. MEMOIRS. a file man(cid:173)
`agement tool designed for adults, uses this approach by
`providing facilities to trigger memory for events as cues in
`recognizing and indexing files. However, event based
`retrieval cues are even less useful than text string names
`when browsing an unfamiliar file system. None of these
`methods has made use of the known human capacity for
`making use of detailed visual information and the use of
`distinguishing visual detail for both recognition and recall.
`Presently exploration of unfamiliar file systems, learning file
`system structure, and retrieval of particular information(cid:173)
`from a file system must take place with few effective
`mnemonic cues. Moreover, it is not possible to utilize the
`power of complex, detailed images to convey information in
`order to orient and acquaint a user with the contents of an
`unfamiliar file system. While "a picture is worth a thousand
`words", explorers in cyberspace must contend with a two or
`three word desaiption and, perhaps, a 32 by 32 pixel icon
`to indicate the contents of a directory or a file.
`Existing interfaces for file management, like that of the
`Macintosh, have been designed in accordance with the
`desktop metaphor. The use of windows to demarcate differ(cid:173)
`ent directory listings, text string descriptions of files and
`
`Ralph Lauren Corp., Exhibit 1007 Page 23
`
`

`

`5,715,416
`
`7
`directories, and even the graphic icons of file folders and
`paper pages that denote directories and files have been
`constructed to resemble a desktop environment. While the
`desktop metaphor works well for task switching among
`applications, and the windows metaphor is suitable for
`applications in which text or numeric symbols are organized
`into separate documents, e.g. text processing or
`spreadsheets,