Information processing device and program

Abstract

To further surely prevent erroneous transmission of an attached document relative to a case where a history of talks utilizing a messenger application is not referenced.SOLUTION: A chat system 10 comprises: an attribute information extraction unit 12 by which, in a case where an attribute value of an attribute relating to an attached document is included in a message in the middle of a talk utilizing a chat, attribute information including the attribute value is stored in an attribute information storage unit 18; an attached document verification unit 13 by which, an attribute value of an attribute item included in the attribute information is extracted by analyzing the attached document when transmission of the attached document is instructed by a talking person; the extracted attribute value is compared with the attribute value included in the attribute information; and in a case where the attribute values are not coincident, it is determined that the attached document may be transmitted erroneously; and an inquiry unit 14 by which, in the case where there is the possibility of the erroneous transmission, propriety of the attached document is confirmed by inquiring a transmission source about whether the attached document is transmitted or not.SELECTED DRAWING: Figure 1

Description

[Technical Field]

[0001] The present invention relates to an information processing device and a program. [Background technology]

[0002] In recent years, an increasing number of companies have adopted business chat as a communication tool to replace email. Business chat provides a messaging function for exchanging messages within chat rooms, and this messaging function has the ability to send attachments, just like email. However, just like email, business chat can also have the problem of accidentally sending attachments.

[0003] Conventionally, for example, Patent Document 1 proposes a system that displays the names of groups and threads within 2 cm above and below the input screen and confirmation screen to prevent sending attachments to the wrong thread or group.

[0004] Furthermore, Patent Document 2 proposes a system that displays a confirmation screen for the contents to be sent when it is detected that work has been performed in another window while message information is being created using an information sharing tool. [Prior art documents] [Patent documents]

[0005] [Patent Document 1] Japanese Patent Application Publication No. 2019-091384 [Patent Document 2] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2017-134516 [Patent Document 3] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2006-227810 [Patent Document 4] Japanese Patent Application Laid-Open No. 2006-259843 Summary of the Invention [Problem to be solved by the invention]

[0006] However, there is a risk that the system will become a mere formality if a warning display is always displayed every time an operation that may result in erroneous transmission is detected, as in Patent Documents 1 and 2. Furthermore, the need to check each time this occurs may increase the burden on the user and reduce work efficiency.

[0007] Incidentally, when sending an attachment using a messenger application on a computer system, before sending the attachment, it may be necessary to exchange information about the attachment through conversation, give some instructions regarding the sending of the attachment, or communicate plans in advance.

[0008] The present invention aims to more reliably prevent the erroneous sending of attached documents than when the conversation history using a messenger app is not referenced. [Means for solving the problem]

[0009] The information processing device of the present invention is equipped with a processor, and when one of the participants in a conversation using a messenger app instructs the other to send an attached document, the processor extracts attribute values ​​of specified attributes related to the attached document from the attached document, and if the attribute values ​​of the specified attributes extracted from the conversation history do not match the attribute values ​​of the specified attributes extracted from the attached document, the processor asks the other participant whether or not to send the attached document.

[0010] The predetermined attribute is information that can identify the document to be sent.

[0011] The information that can identify the document to be transmitted is the format of the document.

[0012] The information that can identify the document to be sent is the type of the document.

[0013] The predetermined attribute is the destination of the attached document.

[0014] The processor is also characterized in that, if the attached document instructed to be sent contains an image of a person, and if none of the users having the conversation are included among the people identified from the image of the person, it asks one of the conversation participants whether or not to send the attached document.

[0015] Furthermore, when the attached document instructed to be sent contains an image of a person, the processor obtains image data of the user having the conversation and compares the image of the person contained in the attached document with the image data to determine whether the image of the user having the conversation is contained in the attached document instructed to be sent.

[0016] Furthermore, if the processor is unable to extract the attribute value of the predetermined attribute from the conversation history, it does not inquire of the one of the conversation participants whether or not to send the attached document.

[0017] The program of the present invention enables a computer to perform the following functions: when one of the parties in a conversation using a messenger app instructs the computer to send an attached document, extracts attribute values ​​of specified attributes related to the attached document from the attached document; and, if the attribute values ​​of the specified attributes extracted from the conversation history do not match the attribute values ​​of the specified attributes extracted from the attached document, asks the one of the parties whether or not to send the attached document. [Effects of the Invention]

[0018] According to the invention described in claim 1, it is possible to more reliably prevent the erroneous sending of attached documents compared to when the conversation history using the messenger app is not referenced.

[0019] According to the invention described in claim 2, it is possible to determine that there is a possibility of an attachment being sent by mistake due to an error in the attached document, and to have the interlocutor who instructed the sending of the attachment confirm whether the attached document is correct.

[0020] According to the invention of claim 3, if the document formats do not match, it can be determined that there is a possibility that the attached document has been sent by mistake.

[0021] According to the invention as set forth in claim 4, if the document types do not match, it can be determined that there is a possibility that the attached document has been sent by mistake.

[0022] According to the invention described in claim 5, it is possible to determine that there is a possibility that the attached document has been sent to the wrong address, and to have the person who instructed the sending of the attached document confirm whether the attached document is correct.

[0023] According to the invention described in claim 6, if the image of the user having the conversation is not included in the images contained in the attached document, it is possible to determine that the attached document may have been sent by mistake, and the person having the conversation who instructed the sending of the attached document can be asked to confirm the accuracy of the attached document.

[0024] According to the invention of claim 7, it is possible to determine the possibility of an attachment being sent by mistake by utilizing image data of a user with whom a conversation is taking place.

[0025] According to the invention of claim 8, when it is not certain that the attached document was sent by mistake, it is not necessary to have the person who instructed the sending of the attached document confirm whether the attached document is correct.

[0026] According to the invention of claim 9, it is possible to more reliably prevent the erroneous sending of attached documents compared to when the conversation history using the messenger app is not referenced. [Brief explanation of the drawings]

[0027] [Figure 1] 1 is a diagram illustrating an example of a configuration of a communication system according to an embodiment of the present invention. [Figure 2] 4 is a diagram showing an example of a data configuration of document type information stored in a document type information storage unit according to the present embodiment. FIG. [Figure 3]3 is a diagram showing an example of a data configuration of attribute information stored in an attribute information storage unit in the present embodiment. FIG. [Figure 4] 10 is a flowchart showing a process when chat is being used in the present embodiment. [Figure 5] 5 is a flowchart showing the attachment sending process shown in FIG. 4. [Figure 6] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing part of history information of a conversation between users A and B in this embodiment. [Figure 7] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing another portion of the history information of the conversation between users A and B in this embodiment. [Figure 8] FIG. 10 is a diagram showing another portion of the history information of the conversation between users A and B in this embodiment. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION

[0028] Hereinafter, preferred embodiments of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings.

[0029] Fig. 1 is a diagram showing an example of the configuration of a communication system according to the present embodiment. Fig. 1 shows a system configuration in which a personal computer (hereinafter referred to as "PC") 1 and a chat system 10 are connected via a network 2 such as the Internet.

[0030] "Chat" is defined as, for example, a system for real-time conversation via the Internet, and chat system 10 provides a chat service to users who use a computer (above "PC1") on which a chat application that enables chat is installed.

[0031] Furthermore, the term "messenger app" is a general term for applications that provide messaging functions, such as exchanging text messages or messages via free IP phone calls, but in this embodiment, the messenger app uses chat to provide users with messaging functions and a file attachment function for sending documents. While this embodiment has been described using chat as an example for communication between users, other messenger apps that provide messaging and file attachment functions may also be used.

[0032] PC1 is an information processing device used by users to chat. For this reason, a chat application is installed on PC1. PC1 can be realized with a conventional general-purpose hardware configuration. That is, PC1 is configured with a CPU, ROM, RAM, storage such as a hard disk drive (HDD), a network interface as a communication means, and a user interface including input means such as a mouse and keyboard, and display means such as a display.

[0033] As described above, chat system 10 provides a chat service to users of PC 1. Chat system 10 is an example of an information processing device according to the present invention, and can be realized with a general-purpose hardware configuration that has existed for some time, such as a server computer. That is, chat system 10 is configured to include at least a CPU, ROM, RAM, storage such as a hard disk drive (HDD), and a network interface as a communication means.

[0034] The chat system 10 includes a conversation processing unit 11, an attribute information extraction unit 12, an attached document verification unit 13, an inquiry unit 14, an attached document transmission unit 15, a control unit 16, a document type information storage unit 17, and an attribute information storage unit 18. Note that components not used in the description of this embodiment are omitted from the drawing.

[0035] The conversation processing unit 11 processes messages exchanged by users posting messages to a chat room, i.e., conversations. The attribute information extraction unit 12 interprets the content of the message by performing natural language processing, and if the message contains an attribute value of a predetermined attribute, extracts the attribute value of the predetermined attribute from the message and stores it as attribute information in the attribute information storage unit 18. To send an attached document, it is necessary to at least specify a destination and attach the document to be sent to the destination. Therefore, the attribute items corresponding to the predetermined attributes are the destination and attribute information related to the attached document. The attribute information related to the attached document is information that can identify the attached document and is information obtained by the attached document verification unit 13 analyzing the attached document. In this embodiment, the document type and document format (hereinafter referred to as "form") will be used as examples of information that can identify the attached document.

[0036] The attachment verification unit 13 extracts attribute values ​​of predetermined attributes by analyzing the document actually attached as an attachment, and determines whether the attribute values ​​are the same by comparing the attribute values ​​of the predetermined attributes extracted from the attachment with the attribute information extracted by the attribute information extraction unit 12. The predetermined attributes extracted by the attachment verification unit 13 are the same as the predetermined attributes extracted by the attribute information extraction unit 12. In other words, the attribute information extraction unit 12 extracts, from the conversation history, predetermined attributes that the attachment verification unit 13 can extract from the actual attachment, i.e., attribute items such as destinations.

[0037] If the compared attribute values ​​do not match, it can be determined that there is a possibility of erroneous transmission, and therefore the inquiry unit 14 inquires of the user who sent the attached document to confirm whether there is a possibility that the destination address or the attached document is incorrect. In this embodiment, the inquiry unit 14 is realized by a chatbot. The attached document sending unit 15 sends the attached document to the destination if it is confirmed that the attached document was not sent by mistake. The control unit 16 controls conversations in the chat system 10, and in particular controls the sending of attached documents carried out during conversations, by working in cooperation with the above-mentioned components 11 to 15.

[0038] 2 is a diagram showing an example of the data configuration of document type information stored in document type information storage unit 17 in this embodiment. The document type information is prepared in advance. For each document type, the document type information is configured by associating the name of a form used in the document of that type with form data that specifies the layout of that document type.

[0039] 3 is a diagram showing an example of the data configuration of attribute information stored in attribute information storage unit 18 in this embodiment. As described above, the attribute information is attribute information related to an attached document extracted by attribute information extraction unit 12. The attribute information is configured by associating attribute items that specify the attribute with attribute values ​​of the attribute items extracted by attribute information extraction unit 12. In this embodiment, a destination and a document form that indicates the form type of the attached document are exemplified as attribute information extracted from conversation history information, but the types of attribute items are not limited to these.

[0040] Each of the components 11 to 16 in chat system 10 is realized by the cooperative operation of a computer that forms chat system 10 and a program that runs on a CPU installed in the computer. Also, each of storage units 17 and 18 is realized by a HDD installed in chat system 10. Alternatively, RAM or external storage means may be used via a network.

[0041] Furthermore, the programs used in the present embodiment can be provided not only by communication means, but also by being stored in a computer-readable recording medium such as a CD-ROM or USB memory. The programs provided from the communication means or recording medium are installed in a computer, and various processes are realized by the computer's CPU sequentially executing the programs.

[0042] Next, the operation of this embodiment will be described.

[0043] In this embodiment, it is assumed that user A and user B, who are using PC 1, each start a chat and are having a conversation as interlocutors. The processing in chat system 10 when chat is in use will be described below with reference to the flowchart shown in FIG.

[0044] After users A and B start a chat and start a conversation, they continue to converse by posting messages using the functions provided by the conversation processing unit 11 until they end the conversation (N in step 110). When the conversation processing unit 11 acquires a message posted by either user A or user B during the conversation between them while the conversation is not ended (Y in step 110) (step 120), the attribute information extraction unit 12 performs natural language processing to interpret the content of the message acquired by the conversation processing unit 11 and determine whether the attached document contains the attribute value of the predetermined attribute described above. If it is determined that the attribute value of the predetermined attribute is not contained (N in step 130), the process proceeds to step 150.

[0045] If it is determined that the attribute value of the predetermined attribute is included in the message (Y in step 130), the attribute information extraction unit 12 stores the attribute value of the predetermined attribute extracted from the message as attribute information in the attribute information storage unit 18 in association with the attribute item, as illustrated in FIG. 3 (step 140).

[0046] Next, if the message does not correspond to an instruction to send an attached document (N in step 150), the process returns to step 110 to process the next message to be posted. On the other hand, if the message corresponds to an instruction to send an attached document (Y in step 150), the attached document sending process described below is executed (step 160). The attached document sending process in this embodiment will be described below using the flowchart shown in FIG. 5. Note that, in this description, it is assumed that the document to be sent is correctly attached. If the attachment is forgotten, the process will be handled in the same way as before, such as by displaying an error message.

[0047] The attachment verification unit 13 performs natural language processing to analyze the attachment attached to the message and extract attribute values ​​of predetermined attributes related to the attachment (step 161). It is preferable to analyze not only the content of the attachment but also information related to the transmission of the attachment, such as the document name and transmission date and time. The attachment verification unit 13 processes the attribute items whose attribute values ​​are stored in the attribute information storage unit 18 in step 140 as the extraction targets. For example, if a destination has not been extracted from the conversation history, there is no destination to compare with, as will be described in the subsequent processing, and therefore there is no need to extract the destination from the attachment in step 161.

[0048] If the analysis result shows that the attached document does not specify a destination (N in step 162), then even if a destination is stored in attribute information storage unit 18, the destination to be compared cannot be extracted from the attached document, and the process proceeds to step 164. On the other hand, if the attached document does specify a destination (Y in step 162), attached document verification unit 13 compares the destination extracted from the attached document with the destination stored in attribute information storage unit 18. If they do not match (N in step 163), the process proceeds to step 167.

[0049] On the other hand, if there is a match (Y in step 163), the attached document verification unit 13 determines that the destination identified from the attached document is correctly specified based on the conversation history. In this case, the attached document verification unit 13 analyzes whether the attached document has a specified form or document type. If the analysis result shows that there is no specified form or document type (N in step 164), even if the form or document type is stored in the attribute information storage unit 18, the form or document type to be compared could not be extracted from the attached document, and the process proceeds to step 166. On the other hand, if there is a specified form or document type in the attached document (Y in step 164), and if the document type is specified, the attached document verification unit 13 identifies the form of the document type identified from the attached document by referring to the document type information. The attached document verification unit 13 then compares the form identified from the attached document with the document form stored in the attribute information storage unit 18. If there is no match (N in step 165), the process proceeds to step 167.

[0050] On the other hand, if they match (Y in step 165), the attachment verification unit 13 determines that the form identified from the attachment is correct as far as the conversation history is concerned. In this case, the attachment sent by the user is determined to be a correct document, and the attachment sending unit 15 sends the attachment to the specified destination (step 166).

[0051] Here, if the destination or the form of the attached document identified from the attached document does not match the attribute value corresponding to the attribute item saved in step 140 (N in step 163, N in 165), the attribute value of the predetermined attribute extracted from the actually attached document does not match the attribute value extracted from the conversation history, and therefore it is not possible to confirm whether the actually attached document is correct as an attached document. In other words, if it is determined that sending the attached document as is may result in erroneous sending, the inquiry unit 14 confirms the legitimacy of the attached document, that is, by inquiring of the user about whether or not to send the attached document (step 167). This user confirmation will be explained using a specific example.

[0052] 6 to 8 are diagrams showing part of the history information of the conversation between users A and B. In FIGS. 6 to 8, the speaker in the conversation is associated with the content of the comment made by that speaker. Note that Bot means a message posted by the inquiry unit 14.

[0053] First, in the example conversation shown in FIG. 6, User A instructs User B to create a document addressed to User A. In other words, the conversation history identifies the destination of the attached document as "User A." User B creates a document in response to User A's request and posts a message to send the document to User A using chat. If a document is attached to the message from User B, the attachment verification unit 13 analyzes the document attached by User B, as described above. If the analysis of the contents of the attached document determines that the destination is a user other than "User A," there is a possibility that the destination is incorrect, i.e., the document was sent by mistake. Therefore, the inquiry unit 14 (Bot) inquires User B, the sender of the document, about whether to send the attached document, as illustrated in FIG. 6. User B checks the attached document in response to the confirmation message from the Bot and responds to the inquiry by selecting "Y" or "N" from the links included in the confirmation message. User B selects "Y" if he wants to send the attached document as is, or selects "N" if he wants to postpone sending the document because he has attached the wrong document, for example.

[0054] Next, in the example conversation shown in FIG. 7, User A sends a document to User B as an attachment to be filled out. In other words, the form of the attached document can be identified from the conversation history by the attached document. For example, if User A attaches the form for Application 1, the form can be identified as “form30-1” by referring to the document type information. User B creates a document by filling in the necessary information in the form “form30-1” at User A’s request, and posts a message to send the created document, i.e., the document, to User A via chat. Here, if a document is attached to the message from User B, as described above, the attachment verification unit 13 analyzes the document attached by User B. Then, if the analysis of the contents of the attached document determines that the form is a form other than “form30-1,” there is a possibility that the document to be attached is incorrect, i.e., there is a possibility of erroneous transmission. Therefore, the inquiry unit 14 (Bot) inquires User B, the sender of the document, about whether or not to send the attached document, as illustrated in FIG. 7. User B selects “Y” or “N,” as described with reference to FIG. 6.

[0055] Next, in the example conversation shown in FIG. 8, User A tells User B that he will send an invoice document once it has been created. In other words, the type of attached document to be sent subsequently can be identified from the conversation history. For example, when User A sends an invoice, the form can be identified as "form20" by referring to the document type information. User A then creates the invoice as instructed in the message to User B and posts a message to send the invoice document, i.e., the document, to User B via chat. Here, if a document is attached to the message from User A, as described above, the attachment verification unit 13 analyzes the document attached by User A. Then, if the analysis of the content of the attached document determines that the form is a form other than the invoice form "form20," there is a possibility that the document to be attached is incorrect, i.e., there is a possibility of erroneous transmission. Therefore, the inquiry unit 14 (Bot) inquires User A, the document sender, about whether or not to send the attached document, as illustrated in FIG. 8. User A selects "Y" or "N," as described with reference to FIG. 6.

[0056] 5, if the user selects "Y" from the confirmation message, it is determined that the attached document can be sent as is (Y in step 168), and the attached document sending unit 15 sends the attached document to the specified destination (step 166). On the other hand, if the user selects "N" from the confirmation message, it is determined that an instruction to suspend sending the attached document has been given (N in step 168), and the chat system 10 ends the attached document sending process.

[0057] Returning to FIG. 4, when the attachment transmission process (step 160) is completed as described above, the process proceeds to step 110.

[0058] According to this embodiment, as explained above, the attribute values ​​of predetermined attributes that can be identified from the conversation history are extracted, and if the attribute values ​​of the attributes extracted from the actually attached document do not match the attribute values ​​of the attributes extracted from the conversation history, it is determined that the attached document may have been sent by mistake, and an inquiry is made to the sender before sending the attached document. This makes it possible to more reliably prevent the attachment from being sent by mistake.

[0059] In the above description, the predetermined attributes are the destination and the document form, but the present invention is not limited to this. For example, a facial image may be used to determine whether a message has been sent to an incorrect address. Specifically, the process is as follows:

[0060] First, facial images of each user are registered in advance in the chat system 10 as image data for identifying the user using the chat. This may be done when the chat application is installed, or may be done later. Here, assume that user A sends an attached document to user B, and the file to be sent contains an image of a person. The attached document verification unit 13 extracts the facial image by performing image analysis on the image of the person in the attached document. The attached document verification unit 13 also acquires pre-registered facial images of the sender and recipient, i.e., the facial images of users A and B, from a storage device (not shown) where the images are registered. The attached document verification unit 13 then compares the facial image extracted from the attached document with the acquired facial images of users A and B. As a result of the comparison, it is determined whether the facial images of users A and B who are having the conversation are included in the facial images of users included in the attached document.

[0061] Here, if the facial images extracted from the attached document do not include a facial image that matches either user A or user B who is having the conversation, the attached document verification unit 13 determines that there is a possibility that the attached document has been sent by mistake.

[0062] When user A sends a photo file to user B, if the photo contains a person's image, it is assumed that both the sender and the recipient are in the photo. However, the determination of the possibility of erroneous transmission illustrated here is merely an example and is not limited to this. For example, if either the sender or the recipient is in the photo, the sender may not be queried about whether or not to send the attached document. In all other cases, i.e., if the attached document contains a photo that does not include user A or user B, it is determined that erroneous transmission may have occurred, and the sender is queried.

[0063] Furthermore, if a message offering to provide a photo of both users A and B is posted in the conversation history between users A and B, it can be determined that a photo that does not include facial images of both users A and B may have been sent by mistake. Furthermore, if the conversation history includes a message offering to provide a photo that includes a user other than the sender and recipient (for example, user C), it can be determined that an attached document that includes a facial image of user C, who has been registered in advance, is unlikely to have been sent by mistake.

[0064] In this embodiment, if an attribute value corresponding to a predetermined attribute (i.e., attribute item) corresponding to an attribute value extracted from the conversation history is extracted from the actual attached document, the respective attribute values ​​are compared. If they do not match, it is determined that there is a possibility of erroneous transmission, and the sender user is inquired about the transmission for confirmation. However, not all attribute items related to the attached document are necessarily included in messages posted in conversations, nor are they necessarily included in the attached document. Therefore, it is easy to imagine a case where an attribute value for the same attribute item cannot be extracted from either the conversation history or the attached document. Therefore, in this embodiment, as described above, in consideration of the effort required to confirm the sender, the sender is not inquired about whether or not to send the attached document. Of course, to more reliably prevent erroneous transmission of attached documents, the sender may be inquired about the transmission of the attached document.

[0065] In the above embodiments, the term "processor" refers to a processor in a broad sense, and includes general-purpose processors (e.g., CPU: Central Processing Unit, etc.) and dedicated processors (e.g., GPU: Graphics Processing Unit, ASIC: Application Specific Integrated Circuit, FPGA: Field Programmable Gate Array, programmable logic device, etc.).

[0066] Furthermore, the operations of the processors in the above embodiments may not only be performed by a single processor, but may also be performed by multiple processors located at physically separate locations working together. Furthermore, the order of the operations of the processors is not limited to the order described in the above embodiments, and may be changed as appropriate. [Explanation of symbols]

[0067] 1 PC, 2 network, 10 chat system, 11 conversation processing unit, 12 attribute information extraction unit, 13 attached document verification unit, 14 inquiry unit, 15 attached document transmission unit, 16 control unit, 17 document type information storage unit, 18 attribute information storage unit.

Claims

1. a processor; The processor: When a conversation is taking place using a messenger app and one of the conversation participants issues an instruction to send an attached document, the attribute values ​​of predetermined attributes related to the attached document are extracted from the attached document; If the attribute value of the predetermined attribute extracted from the conversation history does not match the attribute value of the predetermined attribute extracted from the attached document, inquiring of the one of the conversers about whether or not to send the attached document.

1. An information processing device comprising:

2. 2. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined attribute is information that can identify the document to be transmitted.

3. 3. The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the information capable of identifying the document to be transmitted is the format of the document.

4. 3. The information processing apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the information capable of identifying the document to be transmitted is the type of the document.

5. 2. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the predetermined attribute is a destination of the attached document.

6. The information processing device described in claim 1, characterized in that if the attached document instructed to be sent contains an image of a person, and if none of the users having the conversation are included among the people identified from the image of the person, the processor asks one of the conversants whether or not to send the attached document.

7. The processor: If the attached document instructed to be sent contains an image of a person, image data of the user having the conversation is obtained; determining whether an image of the user engaging in the conversation is included in the attachment being instructed to be sent by comparing an image of the person included in the attachment with the image data; 7. The information processing apparatus according to claim 6,

8. 2. The information processing apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the processor does not inquire of the one of the interlocutors whether or not to send the attached document if the attribute value of the predetermined attribute cannot be extracted from the conversation history.

9. On the computer, A function of extracting attribute values ​​of predetermined attributes related to an attached document from an attached document when one of the parties in a conversation using a messenger app instructs the other to send the attached document; a function of inquiring of the one of the conversation participants whether or not to send the attached document if the attribute value of the predetermined attribute extracted from the conversation history does not match the attribute value of the predetermined attribute extracted from the attached document; A program to achieve this.

Images