Systematic introduction of graphic illustrations in the IPC
Summary prepared by the International Bureau
1.
At its 18th session, the Working Group had decided to start six pilot projects
(projects M 600 to M 605) covering six subclasses with Brazil, Mexico and Spain as
rapporteurs. Rapporteurs were invited to submit comments on the preliminary guidelines to
project WG 171 after the completion of the pilot projects.
2.
Brasil, Japan, Spain, the United States, and the EPO have submitted comments. The
comments not only relate to the guidelines but address the future ways of handling this task in
general, i.e. beyond the pilot projects. This issue should be discussed and settled before
agreeing on amended guidelines. The IB has undertaken to prepare this short summary that
may serve as a basis for discussions.
3.
When reviewing the different statements, the following options appear to emerge:
(a) Continuing the task of introduction of graphical illustrations in the framework of Dprojetcs.
Advantage:
(i) Selection and introduction requires specific expertise regarding the
technical subject matter covered by a place. Technical experts will have to be heard; but the
rapporteur should also have some knowledge of the field. Aquiring such knowledge requires
considerable effort. Therefore, rapporteurs of D-projects may be qualified because they have
to become aquainted with the subject matter anyway when preparing the definitions. (ii)
Furthermore, illustrations were already considered as valuable parts of definitions when the
initial concept was devised of what definition should be and what they could contain. (iii)
Moreover, the illustrations - like the definitions - will also be part of the illustrative and
informative “electronic layer” of the IPC. Bringing together the developments of its different
components into one project would only be logical.
Drawback:
This approach will further increase the burden on rapporteurs of definition
projects and their scope. For the time being, D-projects focus primarily on subclasses while
the illustrations would be primarily for groups. Thus, definitions could be delayed further.
Completed D-projects may have to be reopened.
(b) Continuing in the framework of M-projects; however, at a first stage one should identify
those areas of the IPC which need such illustrations instead of systematically going through
all of them.
Advantage:
The work of selecting suitable material is limited to those areas of the IPC
that would need illustrations. More effort could and should be invested in researching or
establishing additional illustrations because it appears that the currently available illustrations
are of limited usability for the IPC.
Drawback:
Criteria for determing areas needing illustrations would have to be
determined and all places would have to be checked. Such analysis would require already
quite specific knowledge of the subject matter or experience in the field. Already such prior
selection process would consume additional effort and complicate the task additionally.
(c) Continuing as before with systematically going through the submitted collections and
selecting suitable illustrations.