> The first (and I think, most general) claim is:
>
> 1. A system for file management for files containing
> website content comprising:
>
> a work area configured to allow a user to create and maintain web
> content to be displayed on a website, the work area being a file
> system having read and write operations to enable a user to edit
> virtual representations of files having web content that is
located
> in the work area; and
>
> a staging area adapted to receive and integrate the web content
> submitted from the work area when the web content of the work area
> does not conflict with other web content submitted to the staging
> area and configured to retain versions of web content submitted
from
> the work area.
>
If this ever becoms an issue, and someone really needs to or just
plain wants to fight this, I can easily prove prior art. This is
an almost perfect description of how the SCO website has been
managed internally since at least 1996 when I started working there,
and it was already in place.
I think that just goes to show how bogus the claim is. Not only is
there prior art, but it is also a very obvious way of doing things,
and I *THINK* ... I am no lawyer ... but I THINK that patent law is
sensible enough to not allow you to patent obvious concepts.
Kean
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Feb 25 22:32:33 2003