Hierarchical Object Version Comparison and Visualization

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Identifying changes in hierarchical objects shared between different systems is challenging due to concurrent modifications made at the source and destination electronic systems, especially when exporting and synchronizing these objects across systems.

Innovation Solution

A comparison mechanism is implemented to compare multiple versions of a hierarchical object, including a baseline version, to produce data structures representing changes, which are then visualized as result trees, allowing users to easily identify differences and synchronize versions.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Adaptability or versatility

If hierarchical objects are exported and synchronized between systems, then information sharing and collaboration are improved, but identifying changes and maintaining consistency becomes difficult

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveinformation sharing capabilityVSAvoidchange identification difficulty

Core Design Contradiction:

Adaptability or versatilityVSDifficulty of detecting and measuring

Solution Approach 1:

The patent segments the hierarchical object into individual nodes that can be independently compared. Each node is assigned a unique identifier and version number, allowing granular tracking of changes throughout the hierarchy without requiring comparison of the entire structure at once.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The patent introduces an intermediary comparison mechanism that acts as a mediator between source and destination systems. This intermediary process generates comparison reports that highlight specific changes, serving as a bridge that reconciles differences between system versions without requiring direct system-to-system comparison.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Productivity

If concurrent modifications are allowed at source and destination systems, then user productivity and system flexibility are improved, but version consistency and change tracking deteriorate

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveuser productivityVSAvoidversion consistency

Core Design Contradiction:

ProductivityVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements preliminary version numbering and timestamp assignment to each node before modifications occur. This preliminary action establishes a baseline that allows concurrent edits to be tracked and compared later, ensuring that even simultaneous modifications can be reconciled without losing version consistency.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements a feedback mechanism where comparison results are fed back to users, showing them the specific changes made at both source and destination. This feedback loop allows users to understand the impact of concurrent modifications and make informed decisions about synchronization, maintaining version stability while allowing productivity.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #23Feedback

3Measurement precision

If detailed change tracking is implemented across hierarchical objects, then measurement precision of changes is improved, but system complexity and processing overhead increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvechange detection precisionVSAvoidcomparison system complexity

Core Design Contradiction:

Measurement precisionVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent applies local quality by focusing comparison efforts only on specific nodes that have actually changed, rather than comparing entire hierarchical structures. Each node is evaluated independently with appropriate comparison criteria, reducing overall system complexity while maintaining high precision in detecting actual changes.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

4Reliability

If hierarchical objects are synchronized between systems, then data consistency is improved, but processing time and synchronization overhead increase

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvedata consistencyVSAvoidsynchronization time

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSLoss of time

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements partial synchronization by comparing and synchronizing only the specific nodes that have changed, rather than synchronizing the entire hierarchical object. This partial action approach maintains data consistency for affected nodes while significantly reducing the time and overhead required compared to full synchronization.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #16Partial or excessive action

Data Source

PatentUS9098563B2Comparing versions of a hierarchical object

Publication Date: 2015.08.04 MICRO FOCUS LLC

AI summary

A hierarchical object is exported from a first electronic system to a second electronic system, where the hierarchical object is modifiable at each of the first and second electronic systems, and where a baseline version of the hierarchical object is created. A first version of the hierarchical object at the first electronic system is compared against the baseline version, to form a first data structure identifying any changes between the first version of the hierarchical object and the baseline version. A second data structure is received identifying changes between a second version of the hierarchical object at the second electronic system and the baseline version. A visualization based on the first and second data structures is provided.