A somewhat similar project that I started at Google (this was US-only) was: Common constructions of computer terms ("database", "processor", "thread", etc.) These words appear in patent claims, and the claims are what determine infringement (I use the word "construction" instead of "definition" deliberately). You might well think there's a standard dictionary of them. There is not, at least as of 5-6 years ago. The p…
There are some patent dictionaries based on how US courts defined terms. For example (over a decade old): http://www.pubpat.org/garrod-glossaries.htm The USPTO also had a glossary pilot program at some point, but it ended and I guess was not considered useful: https://www.uspto.gov/patents/initiatives/glossary-initiativ... I think patent attorneys and agents could avoid most of this problem if they wrote better. I'm…
Having been in Litigation: there's immense value in having vague terms. 15 years later when you're asserting the patent, you really need to be able to say your claims cover something you couldn't possibly have anticipated.
I know that's legal gamesmanship and I'm not applauding it.