Of course, if there is no ambiguity and it can be clearly stated, the expression should be colloquial, such as "most people think." . . It will run a little slowly. . . "It's no big deal. As long as there is no ambiguity, the examiner won't ask for corrections, and don't be so colloquial that it becomes a dialect that only some areas understand. In fact, there will be no problem, as long as it is clear and accurate, and it is not a big problem to express a little daily oral conversation.
Part of the content of the embodiment suggests to elaborate the principle on which this patent scheme is based, describe the movement process of the equipment if possible, and deduce the beneficial effects of the technical scheme according to the principle and the movement process of the mechanism.
The main function of the specification is to support the scope summarized in the claim, that is, the claim is a summary of the technical scheme, and the technical features will be summarized in the writing process. The main function of the embodiment is to fully explain the implementation process and means of the technical scheme. The more comprehensive the embodiment is, the more the scope outlined in the claims can be supported.
The specification is like a dictionary of claims. If there is something unclear in the claim, or the claim involves words that may be ambiguous, it can be supplemented in the examples, for example, "The reagents involved in this application specifically refer to. . . No. . . "When the claim involves ambiguous positional words, it can also be explained in the specification, such as" left, right, front, back, etc. ".
Generally speaking, the embodiment part can be written in this way, and the beneficial effects of the scheme can be deduced by combining the technical background, principle, movement process and realization means. As a dictionary of claims, it is not clear that the content of claims is complete for the technology in this field.