2000
DOI: 10.1007/s005300000046
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An algebra for creating and querying multimedia presentations

Abstract: Over the last few years, there has been a tremendous increase in the number of interactive multimedia presentations prepared by different individuals and organizations. In this paper, we present an algebra for creating and querying interactive multimedia presentation databases. This algebra operates on trees whose branches reflect different possible playouts of a set of presentations. The algebra not only extends all the classical relational operators to such databases, but also introduces a variety of novel o… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
17
0
1

Year Published

2002
2002
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
3
3
3

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(18 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
(20 reference statements)
0
17
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…According to that, a combination of single modules in language profiles was possible [TeleMidia Lab -PUC-Rio 2011]. NCL 2.0 contained 21 modules from 11 functional areas [Silva et al 2004 -Further Multimedia Presentation Models and Languages: Further multimedia presentation/document models and languages are described by Adali et al [1999Adali et al [ , 2000, Adiba and Zechinelli-Martini [1999], Assimakopoulos [1999], Deng et al [2002a], and Scherp and Boll [2005]. Further models are ZYX [Boll et al 1999[Boll et al , 2000Boll and Klas 2001], the Layered Multimedia Data Model (LMDM) [Schloss and Wynblatt 1994]; Madeus [Layaida and Sabry-Ismail 1996], and MPGS [Bertino et al 2000].…”
Section: Standards Models and Languages For Interactive Multimedia mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…According to that, a combination of single modules in language profiles was possible [TeleMidia Lab -PUC-Rio 2011]. NCL 2.0 contained 21 modules from 11 functional areas [Silva et al 2004 -Further Multimedia Presentation Models and Languages: Further multimedia presentation/document models and languages are described by Adali et al [1999Adali et al [ , 2000, Adiba and Zechinelli-Martini [1999], Assimakopoulos [1999], Deng et al [2002a], and Scherp and Boll [2005]. Further models are ZYX [Boll et al 1999[Boll et al , 2000Boll and Klas 2001], the Layered Multimedia Data Model (LMDM) [Schloss and Wynblatt 1994]; Madeus [Layaida and Sabry-Ismail 1996], and MPGS [Bertino et al 2000].…”
Section: Standards Models and Languages For Interactive Multimedia mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Adali et al [1] suggested an algebra for creating and querying interactive multimedia presentation databases based on a tree model, whose branches reflect different "playouts" of the presentation determined by user interactions. Both approaches are not sufficient for Flash retrieval since (1) they do not tailor to the specific characteristics of Flash presentation, and (2) they are not automated.…”
Section: Content-based Retrieval (Cbr) Techniquementioning
confidence: 99%
“…Both approaches are not sufficient for Flash retrieval since (1) they do not tailor to the specific characteristics of Flash presentation, and (2) they are not automated. Although the approach of Adali et al [1] is probably the first piece of work (to our knowledge) addressing the user interactivity in multimedia data, the complexity and diversity of user interactions in Flash are far beyond the capability of the simple tree model used in their approach. For example, the tree model cannot describe the situation that a segment of frames in a Flash movie is played in loops as the result of user interactions.…”
Section: Content-based Retrieval (Cbr) Techniquementioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 The authors of multimedia presentations must design the coordinated playback of different media and the consistent interpretation of user interactions. If information that is displayed comes from a data repository, its identification and extraction requires additional care.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%