Systems and methods for creating electronic content using creation applications of limited capabilities

Patent metadata

Field	Value
Publication number	US-9594468-B2
Application number	US-88992010-A
Country	US
Kind code	B2
Filing date	Sep 24, 2010
Priority date	Sep 24, 2010
Publication date	Mar 14, 2017
Grant date	Mar 14, 2017

Abstract

One exemplary embodiment involves receiving electronic content to be displayed and edited in an application that has limited capabilities for editing an item of the electronic content. The application opens the electronic content for editing and displays a notification indicating that editing of the item is restricted in the application. Such an application can also be configured to address one or more of various additional circumstances. For example, the application may identify representations to be displayed for items that cannot be directly displayed. As another example, the application may provide an edit approver that determines whether edits that have effects on the item are allowed.

First claim

That which is claimed:

1. A computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving, at an application executing on a device, electronic content comprising items to be displayed and edited in a What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get (WYSIWYG) interface of the application, wherein the application has limited capabilities for editing an item of the items of the electronic content, wherein the application has limited capabilities for editing the item because the item comprises a feature or attribute that the application is not capable of editing, the feature or attribute editable in a second application having different editing capabilities than the application;
opening the electronic content for editing in the application; and
indicating, in the application, that editing of the item is restricted.

2. The method of claim 1 further comprising:
determining that the application cannot display the item; and
if a representation can be used to represent the item, displaying the representation of the item in the WYSIWYG interface, wherein the application allows editing of one or more attributes of the item based on edits received to the representation, wherein the application does not allow editing of one or more other attributes of the item.

3. The method of claim 2 further comprising determining a size, shape, and position for displaying the representation of the item in the WYSIWYG interface based on corresponding attributes defined for the item in declarative statements of the electronic content that the application identifies by parsing the declarative statements.

4. The method of claim 2 further comprising fabricating data for inclusion in the representation based on the analysis of the item.

5. The method of claim 1 wherein indicating that editing of the item is restricted comprises displaying a notification when the item or a representation of the item is selected from amongst the items displayed or represented in the WYSIWYG interface of the application.

6. The method of claim 5 wherein the notification is provided in a panel otherwise used for editing item characteristics, wherein use of the panel to edit the item is not allowed.

7. The method of claim 6 wherein arbitrary code specifies interactivity of the item in the electronic content, wherein the panel is an interactivity panel.

8. The method of claim 6 wherein the panel is a timeline panel or a data panel.

9. The method of claim 1 further comprising:
receiving an edit associated with the item;
determining whether an effect of the edit is acceptable;
if the effect of the edit is acceptable, allowing the edit; and
if the effect of the edit is not acceptable, prohibiting the edit and displaying a second notification indicating that the edit has been prohibited.

10. The method of claim 9 wherein the edit is a deletion of the item, wherein the application determines that the effect is not acceptable because arbitrary code that depends on the electronic content would fail if the item were deleted.

11. The method of claim 9 wherein the application determines that the effect is acceptable because arbitrary code that depends on the item can be safely removed if the item were deleted such that the electronic content would not fail.

12. The method of claim 1 wherein the application has limited capabilities for editing the item because the item is associated with a behavioral attribute that the application is not capable of editing.

13. The method of claim 1 wherein the application has limited capabilities for editing the item because the item is associated with imperative code that the application is not capable of compiling.

14. The method of claim 1 wherein the application has limited capabilities for editing the item because the feature or attribute is defined at least in part based on arbitrary code added to the item via the second application.

15. The method of claim 1 further comprising, prior to receiving the electronic content at the application, editing the electronic content via the second application, wherein the editing comprises editing a behavior-oriented construct, complex imperative code, or a custom code construct, wherein the behavior-oriented construct, complex imperative code, or custom code construct cannot be edited by the application.

16. The method of claim 1 further comprising editing a display attribute of the item via the first application.

17. The method of claim 1 wherein the application is capable of editing standard elements defined by standard framework code but not capable of editing arbitrary code, wherein the second application is capable of editing arbitrary code.

18. A computer-implemented method comprising:
receiving, at a first application executing on a device, electronic content comprising items to be displayed and edited in a What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get (WYSIWYG) interface of the first application, wherein the first application has limited capabilities for editing an item of the items of the electronic content, wherein the first application has limited capabilities for editing the item because the item comprises a feature or attribute that the first application is not capable of editing, the feature or attribute editable in a second application having different editing capabilities than the application;
determining, at the first application, whether the first application will open the electronic content for editing by determining whether the item conforms to one or more requirements;
if it is determined that the first application will open the electronic content, opening the electronic content in the first application; and
if it is determined that the first application will not open the electronic content, displaying a notification in the first application.

19. The method of claim 18
wherein the item is associated with arbitrary code received in a text editor application for inclusion in the electronic content; and
wherein determining whether the item conforms to one or more requirements comprises determining whether the arbitrary code conforms to the one or more requirements.

20. The method of claim 18 wherein the second application performed a compatibility check to determine whether the electronic content with the arbitrary code is compatible with the first application, wherein the first application uses the same compatibility check for determining whether to open the electronic content.

21. The method of claim 18 wherein the first application and second application are both parts of a single application.

22. A system comprising:
a processor executing instructions stored in a computer readable medium to provide an application, the application comprising:
a module for receiving electronic content comprising items to be displayed and edited in the application, wherein the application has limited capabilities for editing an item of the items of the electronic content, the item editable in a second application having different editing capabilities than the application; and
a module for displaying the electronic content for editing in a What-You-See-Is-What-You-Get (WYSIWYG) interface of the application, wherein a notification is displayed indicating that editing of the item is restricted in the application.

23. The system of claim 22 wherein the system further comprises an edit approver for receiving an edit associated with the item and determining whether the edit is acceptable based on the analysis of arbitrary code.

24. A non-tra

Assignees

• Cath Adam
• Winnie R Douglas
• Frazer Bruce
• Cannizzaro Matthew
• Adobe Systems Inc

Inventors

• Cath Adam
• Winnie R Douglas
• Frazer Bruce
• Cannizzaro Matthew

Classifications

• G06F3/048 Primary

  Interaction techniques based on graphical user interfaces [GUI] · CPC title