Abstract:
Methods and apparatus for using a browser history file to determine web site reach are disclosed. An example method includes accessing Web site access history information stored at a client computer, accessing a user setting corresponding to a duration of time for retention of the Web site access history information, and sending the Web site access history information and the user setting to a collection computer different from the client computer.

Description:
RELATED APPLICATIONS 
       [0001]    This patent arises from a Continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/094,061, filed Mar. 30, 2005, entitled “USE OF BROWSER HISTORY FILE TO DETERMINE WEB SITE REACH”, which is a Continuation of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/103,026, filed Jun. 23, 1998, entitled “USE OF BROWSER HISTORY FILE TO DETERMINE WEB SITE REACH.” U.S. patent application Ser. No. 11/094,061 and U.S. patent application Ser. No. 09/103,026 are hereby incorporated by reference in their entirety. 
     
    
     FIELD OF THE DISCLOSURE 
       [0002]    The present disclosure relates to an arrangement whereby Web site reach is determined from the history files of browsers. 
       BACKGROUND OF THE DISCLOSURE 
       [0003]    The Internet has proven to be an efficient and popular mechanism for the dissemination of information from content providers to content recipients. Content providers in many cases are organizations, such as businesses, governmental agencies, educational institutions, and the like, who operate Web sites in order to provide information that can be downloaded by content recipients. The content recipients are often consumers who use computers typically located in their dwellings to access the content provided by content providers. However, content recipients may also be other businesses, governmental agencies, educational institutions, and the like. In many cases, a content provider is also a content recipient. 
         [0004]    The operators of Web sites, as well as those who create and place content (such as advertisements) for Web sites, have an interest in measuring the reach of content. Reach is typically determined by the number of unique visitors who visit a Web site. Web site operators, and those who create and place content, may then draw market relevant conclusions from the reach of their content. 
         [0005]    Several arrangements have been proposed in order to measure reach. For example, it is known for a Web site to itself measure reach by determining the number of unique visitors who visit a Web site. However, such a measurement is localized in that it provides little information about the reach of content offered by other Web sites, such as competitive Web sites. Also, this measurement provides no information about the demographic information about the reach. 
         [0006]    Accordingly, it has been proposed to install software meters on the computers of statistically selected panelists so that reach, and other information related to content, can be measured and extrapolated over the population as a whole, in much the same way that TV ratings are generated. According to this proposal, the software meters track operating system messages in order to detect communications of interest. When the software meters detect communications of interest, the software meters log the titles of the corresponding windows which are displayed to a computer user. However, logging titles of windows containing Internet content is not particularly useful because such titles can be very generic. For example, one such title which is popular with many content providers is simply “Home Page.” This title provides little indication of the information supplied to the content recipient. 
         [0007]    Moreover, tagging of Internet content has been broadly suggested. However, the context in which tagging has been suggested requires widespread industry cooperation, and it is unlikely that such widespread industry cooperation is attainable. 
     
    
     
       BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS  
         [0008]    These and other aspects of the present disclosure will become more apparent from a detailed consideration of the disclosure when taken in conjunction with the drawings: 
           [0009]      FIG. 1  illustrates a metering system according to the present disclosure in which browser histories are reported to a central facility from a plurality of computers located at corresponding statistically selected sites. 
           [0010]      FIG. 2  illustrates an exemplary embodiment of a software routine which may be executed by the central facility in order to obtain the browser histories from the computers of  FIG. 1 . 
           [0011]      FIG. 3  illustrates an alternative metering system according to the present disclosure in which a plurality of meters resident on computers at corresponding statistically selected sites report browser histories to a central facility. 
           [0012]      FIG. 4  illustrates an exemplary embodiment of a software routine which may be used for the meters of  FIG. 3 . 
           [0013]      FIG. 5  illustrates an example flowchart of an example method for metering a web site. 
       
    
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION  
       [0014]    A metering system  10  is shown in  FIG. 1  as an exemplary application of the present disclosure. The metering system  10  includes a plurality of computers  12  each of which is located at a corresponding panelist location  14 . The computers  12  may be referred to herein as metered computers. The panelist locations  14  are statistically selected, such as by a central facility  16 , in order to participate in a Web site reach survey. For example, personnel at the central facility  16  or elsewhere may implement random digit dialing in order to find the users of the computers  12  for participation in the Web site reach survey. 
         [0015]    The purpose of the Web site reach survey is to determine the reach of one or more Web sites  18  to the users of the computers  12 . The Web site reach survey may provide such information as the number of users reached by the Web sites  18 , the demographics of the users reached by the Web sites  18 , and the like. 
         [0016]    As shown in  FIG. 1 , one or more of the Web sites  18  may be reached through an Internet Service Provider  20 . The users of the computers  12  reach the Web sites  18  through browsers  22  operating on the computers  12 . The computers  12 , the central-facility  16 , the Web sites  18 , and the Internet Service Provider  20  are interconnected by a network  24  which, for example, may be a public telephone system, an internal network, or the like. 
         [0017]    Many browsers, such as the Netscape Navigator RTM browser and the Internet Explorer browser, store the URLs and other information of the Web pages which are accessed by surfers whenever the surfers go to Web pages, either by clicking on hyperlinks or by typing in URLs directly. The Netscape Navigator RTM browser stores the URLs in a flat database history file, while the Internet Explorer browser stores the URLs and other information in a directory as a structured historical hierarchy according to date and week of access. Surfers use the data stored in these histories to allow them to return to pages which they recently visited. 
         [0018]    Therefore, in order to conduct the Web site reach survey, the users of the computers  12 , who have been statistically selected as discussed above and who have agreed to participate in the survey, are directed to a Web page residing on a server of the central facility  16 . The Web page at the central facility  16  contains a history file retrieval program which the server at the central facility  16  downloads to the computers  12  of those users who have accessed that Web page. The history file retrieval program retrieves the information stored by the browsers  22  in the history files and causes this information to be uploaded to the server of the central facility  16 . It should be noted that the server of the central facility  16  preferably stores multiple history file retrieval programs, one for each of the different types of browsers of the panelists participating in the Web site reach survey. Thus, once the server at the central facility  16  has identified the type of browser a panelist accessing its Web page is using, it may download the correct history file retrieval program. 
         [0019]    A browser does not necessarily retain the information in its history file indefinitely. For example, some browsers allow the user to set the length of time that history file information is retained. Such browsers may also time stamp each entry in the history file with the time of the last visit. Accordingly, if a user returns to a page that the user has seen before, the time stamp is overwritten with the latest time, such that entries in the history file are not duplicated on repeat visits. 
         [0020]    Other browsers store the history information with time stamps in directories according to the week in which the Web pages are visited. These browsers may also permit the user to set the number of days that the historical information is retained. Thus, for example, if the user sets the number of retention days to twenty, these browsers will maintain three directories, one for two weeks ago, one for one week ago, and one for the current week. Therefore, if a user is running such a browser on a Wednesday, there will be subdirectories for Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday under the Current Week directory in the history file. With this approach, many entries may be duplicated when the same page is visited more than once. For example, a page may appear in each weekday subdirectory and in each prior week directory depending on the user&#39;s use of the browser. However, as duplicate entries in the current week directory age (e.g., from Sunday to Monday), many of the entries are deleted or merged into one entry for the week. Duplicate entries across week boundaries are not merged. 
         [0021]    Even though the information in these history files in not retained indefinitely, this information is still useful to indicate the number and demographics of people who reach the Web sites  18 . Also, the information acquired by the server of the central facility  16  can be improved by the frequency with which the information is uploaded to the server of the central facility  16 . 
         [0022]    Accordingly, the server at the central facility  16  may execute a software routine  30  shown in  FIG. 2  whenever a user accesses its home page. The user may access this home page on the user&#39;s own initiative, or the software routine  30  may prompt the user to initiate access by sending a message, such as an e-mail, to the user requesting the user to access this home page. However access is initiated, the server at the central facility  16  waits for a Web message at a block  32 . When the server at the central facility  16  receives a Web message at the block  32 , the server at the central facility  16  determines at a block  34  whether the user sending the current Web message is a panelist who has been selected for participation in the Web site reach survey. For example, the server at the central facility  16  may refer to a list of panelists who have agreed to participate in the Web site reach survey. If the user is not a panelist (e.g., the user is not on the list), the server at the central facility  16  at a block  36  hands off the received message to other software for appropriate processing. (Alternatively, program flow may simply return to the block  32  to await the next message.) 
         [0023]    However, if the user is a panelist, an application is sent at a block  38  to the user&#39;s computer  12 . This application may be a Java applet, JavaScript, or an ActiveX control. The user&#39;s permission is required to access information on the hard disk of the user&#39;s computer. In Java and JavaScript, permission is obtained in the form of a signed application (as opposed to an unprivileged application that runs in a sand-box environment). An ActiveX application requires the user&#39;s authorization even if the application does not need to access the hard disk of the user&#39;s computer. The latest versions of many browsers allow a programmer to automate the download and subsequent execution of a signed application on a single Web page. All the panelist may be required to do is to go to the specified Web page and click the “Okay” or similar icon or button in response to a security override request. 
         [0024]    The application downloaded to the panelist&#39;s computer is arranged to access the history file stored by the computer&#39;s browser, to insert the appropriate information stored in the history file into a message, and to communicate the message to the server at the central facility  16 . For example, the application may be arranged to open a regular socket back to the server, or the application may be arranged to post the information back to the server through an HTTP daemon, or the application may be arranged to simply e-mail the information back to the server. Alternatively, the application may be arranged to access the history file, to store appropriate information from the history file in a log, and to later communicate the logged information to the server at the central facility  16 . 
         [0025]    The server at the central facility  16  determines at a block  40  whether the central facility  16  has received information in response to the application downloaded at the block  38 . If the server of the central facility  16  has not received the information, the server determines at a block  42  whether it should again send the application down to the user&#39;s computer. If the application can be resent, the processing at the blocks  38  and  40  is repeated. In this manner, a predetermined number of attempts may be made to retrieve history data from each panelist. If the application should not be resent, program flow returns to the block  32  to await another message. 
         [0026]    If the server at the central facility  16  has received the history information as determined at the block  40 , the server at a block  44  suitably processes the history information and then logs the history information in a database along with history information received from other panelists. The history information can be assembled into reports as directed by the customers of the central facility  16 . 
         [0027]    In processing the history information, the server at the central facility  16  preferably arranges the history information from different browsers into a common format. For example, because some browsers may contain duplicate data and some may not, it may be preferable to eliminate duplicate data. It should be noted that some or all of the processing required to transform the data to a common format may be effected on the panelist&#39;s computer. 
         [0028]    Also, the data from all weeks and days should be merged and any entry that is a duplicate may be discarded in favor of the most recent entry. The parameter that controls the length of time that the history information is maintained is an integral part of the history information and should preferably be maintained in the server database so that reach data is given the proper time line. For example, data from a browser with an expiration time of ten days cannot be used to measure reach over a period extending to before that interval. 
         [0029]    A metering system  50  shown in  FIG. 3  represents an alternative embodiment of the present disclosure. The metering system  50  includes a plurality of computers  52  each of which is located at a corresponding panelist location  54 . The computers  52  may be referred to herein as metered computers. The panelist locations  54  are statistically selected to participate in a Web site reach survey. As before, the purpose of the Web site reach survey is to determine the reach of one or more Web sites  58  to the users of the computers  52 . As shown in  FIG. 3 , one or more of the Web sites  58  are reached through an Internet Service Provider  60 . The users of the computers  52  reach the Web sites  58  through browsers (not shown) operating on the computers  52 . The computers  52 , the central facility  56 , the Web sites  58 , and the Internet Service Provider  60  are interconnected by a network  64  which, for example, may be a public telephone system, an internal network, or the like. 
         [0030]    In the metering system  50 , a software meter  66  acquires the history information which is accumulated by the browsers running on corresponding ones of the computers  52 . The software meter  66 , as shown in  FIG. 4 , determines when a corresponding browser makes an entry into a history file at a block  70 . When the software meter  66  determines that the browser is making an entry into the history file, the entry at a block  72  is intercepted, is copied to a separate log file, and is then passed to the history file. In parallel, the software meter  66  determines at a block  74  whether it is time to transmit the contents of the log file to the central facility  56 . If it is time to transmit the contents of the log file to the central facility  56 , the log file is tested at a block  76  to determine whether it has accumulated any history information since the time for the last transmission to the central facility  56 . If history information has been accumulated in the log file since this time, the software meter  66  packages the history information with the address of the central facility  56  in a message at a block  78  and transmits the message at a block  80 . After a new entry in the history file is logged at the block  72 , or if it is not time to transmit the contents of the log file as determined at the block  74 , or if the log file contains no data since the time for the last transmission to the central facility  56  as determined at a block  76 , or after the contents of the log file are transmitted to the central facility  56  at the block  80 , program flow then returns to the blocks  70  and  74 . 
         [0031]    Certain modifications of the present disclosure have been discussed above. Other modifications will occur to those practicing in the art of the present disclosure. For example, the software routine  30  is arranged as described above to determine at the block  34  whether a user accessing the central facility is a panelist. Instead, the software routine  30  may be associated with a dedicated survey Web page that can be accessed only by a panelist. If so, the block  34  may be unnecessary, but may be provided as a filter to filter out non-panelists who accidentally access this dedicated Web page. 
         [0032]    Also, the software meter  66  is arranged to intercept information being stored in a history file by a corresponding browser. However, the software meter  66  may instead be arranged to access information from this history file on a periodic basis, such as once a day, once a week, or the like. 
         [0033]    Moreover, the software meter  66  is described above as being resident on a corresponding computer  52 . Instead, the functions performed by the software meter  66  may be performed by a hardware and/or software unit connected to the corresponding computer  52 . 
         [0034]    Furthermore, the software meter  66  as described above transmits accumulated logged history information. Instead, the software meter  66  may be arranged to transmit the history information as soon as it is detected at the block  70 . That is, the software meter  66  copies the history information for immediate transmission to the central facility or other destination. Alternatively, the history information may be simply copied to a disk for posting back to the central facility or other destination. 
         [0035]    Additionally, the computers  12  and  52  may be provided with mechanisms to determine the identities of their users and to transmit such identities to the central facilities  16  and  56 . For example, the computers  12  and  52  may implement face recognition or other recognition techniques in order to identify the users, or the computers  12  and  52  may require the users to identify themselves. These identifications, together with demographic data about the panelists stored at the computers  12  and  52  or at the central facilities  16  and  56 , provide information which is useful in generating reports for the customers of the central facilities  16  and  56 . 
         [0036]      FIG. 5  illustrates an example flowchart of an example method for metering a web site. According to the example method, a user input including a reference to a Web site is received at a first computer (block  502 ). In response, the first computer accesses the website (block  504 ). The method further comprises, maintaining a browser history stored on the first computer (block  506 ). The browser history stores a reference to the Web site in response to the browser accessing the Web site. The browser history is maintained by browser functionality native to the browser and the browser history has a first format. A message instructing the first computer to send the message to a second computer is received at the first computer (block  508 ). A message is then sent from the first computer to the second computer after the browser history is populated with information (block  510 ). The first computer receives an application from the second computer in response to the message (block  512 ). The application is executed at the first computer (block  514 ). Next, the reference to the Web site is stored at a third computer (block  516 ). Then, the method of  FIG. 5  terminates. 
         [0037]    Accordingly, the description of the present disclosure is to be construed as illustrative only and is for the purpose of teaching those skilled in the art the best mode of carrying out the disclosure. The details may be varied substantially without departing from the spirit of the disclosure, and the exclusive use of all modifications which are within the scope of the appended claims is reserved.