- From: Dudley Mills <dudmills@ozemail.com.au>
- Date: Fri, 20 Feb 1998 13:51:20 +1100
- To: www-talk@w3.org
- CC: James Whitescarver <jim@njit.edu>
James Whitescarver <jim@njit.edu> wrote: > > > "http://www.ozemail.com.au/~dudmills/CCGpatent.html" > > is about more than just yellow pages . > > ... > > > I am trying to provide improvements in web searching technology which > > businesses will find valuable enough to license. > > ICE (Internet Content Exchange, > http://www.redherring.com/insider/1998/0211/ice.html) will be patent free. > Search and creation tools can be licenced.... Hi James, I regret that I have not had time to this moment to give ICE worthy consideration. Doubtless you are more familiar with the technology than I am. Would you be be interested in making observations comparing the ICE and CCG technology? CCG is aimed at improving web searchability through improved search engine databases derived from quite simple structured classification, contact and geographic data contained in the BODY of web pages. Apparently only 15% to 20% of web page accesses start from search engine provided links, the others from site to site links. However, this does not diminish the importance of search engines. They are excellent "democratisers" in that even small poorly linked sites have a chance of being seen. Am I wrong to think that ICE is primarily addressing data interchange between businesses such as between a retailer and a wholesaler? This seems a most worthy objective but does it help the consumer directly? It appears that Firefly and Vignette have put a lot of creative work into ICE and I hope they reap a satisfactory reward. I wonder if they purposefully decided not to patent their invention. Kind regards, Dudley Mills, 30 Hutchison Crescent, Kambah, ACT 2902, Australia. phone/fax: +61-2-6296-2639 email: dudmills@ozemail.com.au web: http://www.ozemail.com.au/~dudmills/
Received on Thursday, 19 February 1998 21:53:04 UTC