You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
In recent application files (2011, for example) US patent applications are named with the format Country+Year+Number+Type (e.g., US20110002889A1).
In recent grant files (2010, for example), citations of US patent applications are (often? always?) named with the format Country+Year+/+Number+Type (e.g., US2011/0002889A1).
(I qualify as "recent" only because I have not looked further back.)
At least within the US Patent Corpus (applications + citations), referential integrity should be maintained.
Not sure whether this is a bug or an enhancement.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Over time improvements have been made. And agree with your comment about referential integrity. Though for patent law, data integrity is of high importance (lawyers want to see the exact original) so the public XML maintains the integrity as filed by the applicant or law firm. I try to do my best to correct what I can.
In recent application files (2011, for example) US patent applications are named with the format Country+Year+Number+Type (e.g., US20110002889A1).
In recent grant files (2010, for example), citations of US patent applications are (often? always?) named with the format Country+Year+/+Number+Type (e.g., US2011/0002889A1).
(I qualify as "recent" only because I have not looked further back.)
At least within the US Patent Corpus (applications + citations), referential integrity should be maintained.
Not sure whether this is a bug or an enhancement.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: