Explicitly Representing Superimposed Information in a Conceptual Model

  • Sudarshan Murthy
  • Lois Delcambre
  • David Maier
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4215)


Superimposed information (SI) refers to new information such as annotations and summaries overlaid on fragments of existing base information (BI) such as web pages and PDF documents. Each BI fragment is referenced using an encapsulated address called a mark. Based on the widespread applicability of SI and wide range of superimposed applications (SAs) that can be built, we consider here how to represent marks explicitly in a conceptual model for an SA. The goal of this work is to facilitate the development of SAs by making it easy to model SI (including the marks) and to exploit the middleware and query capability that we have developed for managing marks and interacting with the base applications. The contribution of this paper is a general-purpose framework to make marks explicit in a conceptual (ER) model. We present conventions to associate marks with entities, attributes, and relationships; and to represent that an attribute’s value is the same as the excerpt obtained from a mark. We also provide procedures to automatically convert ER schemas expressed using our conventions to relational schemas, and show how a resulting relational schema supports SQL queries over the combination of SI, the associated marks and the excerpts associated with the marks.


Entity Type Relational Schema Relationship Type Base Application Relationship Pattern 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    UML 2.0 OCL Specification, Object Management Group, Inc. (2005)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Baru, C., Gupta, A., Ludäscher, B., Marciano, R., Papakonstantinou, Y., Velikhov, P., Chu, V.: XML-Based Information Mediation with MIX. In: Proceedings of SIGMOD 1999, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 597–599 (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bowers, S., Delcambre, L., Maier, D.: Superimposed Schematics: Introducing E-R Structure for In-Situ Information Selections. In: Spaccapietra, S., March, S.T., Kambayashi, Y. (eds.) ER 2002. LNCS, vol. 2503, pp. 90–104. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Carey, M.J., Haas, L.M., Schwarz, P.M., Arya, M., Cody, W.F., Fagin, R., Flickner, M., Luniewski, A.W., Niblack, W., Petkovic, D., Thomas, J., Williams, J.H., Wimmers, E.L.: Towards heterogeneous multimedia information systems: The Garlic approach (1994)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Casanova, M.A., Tucherman, L., Lima, M.J.D., Netto, J.L.R., Rodriguez, N.R., Soares, L.F.G.: The Nested Context Model for Hyperdocuments. In: Proceedings of Hypertext 1991, San Antonio, Texas, pp. 193–201 (1991)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cysneiros, L.M., Leite, J.C., Neto, J.M.: A Framework for Integrating Non-Functional Requirements into Conceptual Models. Requirements Engineering 6(2), 97–115 (2001)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Delcambre, L., Maier, D., Bowers, S., Weaver, M., Deng, L., Gorman, P., Ash, J., Lavelle, M., Lyman, J.: Bundles in Captivity: An Application of Superimposed Information. In: Proceedings of ICDE 2001, Heidelberg, Germany, pp. 111–120 (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Elmasri, R., Navathe, S.B.: Fundamentals of Database Systems, 4th edn. Addison-Wesley, Reading (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Feyer, T., Thalheim, B.: Many-Dimensional Schema Modeling. In: Manolopoulos, Y., Návrat, P. (eds.) ADBIS 2002. LNCS, vol. 2435, pp. 305–318. Springer, Heidelberg (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Garzotto, F., Mainetti, L., Paolini, P.: HDM2: Extending the E-R Approach to Hypermedia Application Design. In: ER 1993, Arlington, Texas, pp. 178–189 (1993)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Maier, D., Delcambre, L.: Superimposed Information for the Internet. In: Proceedings of WebDB 1999, Philadelphia, PA, pp. 1–9 (1999)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Murthy, S., Maier, D.: A Framework for Relationship Pattern Languages, Portland State University (unpublished, 2005),
  13. 13.
    Murthy, S., Maier, D., Delcambre, L.: Querying Bi-level Information. In: Proceedings of 7th International Workshop on the Web and Databases, Paris, France, pp. 7–12 (2004)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Murthy, S., Maier, D., Delcambre, L., Bowers, S.: Putting Integrated Information in Context: Superimposing Conceptual Models with SPARCE. In: Proceedings of First Asia-Pacific Conference of Conceptual Modeling, Dunedin, New Zealand, pp. 71–80 (2004)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ramakrishnan, R., Gehrke, J.: Database Management Systems, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill, New York (2003)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tanaka, A.K., Navathe, S.B., Chakravarthy, S., Karlapalem, K.: ER-R: An Enhanced ER Model with Situation-Action Rules to Capture Application Semantics. In: Proceedings of 10th International Conference on Entity-Relationship Approach (ER 1991), San Mateo, California, pp. 59–75 (1991)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Thalheim, B.: Entity-Relationship Modeling, Foundations of Database Technology. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sudarshan Murthy
    • 1
  • Lois Delcambre
    • 1
  • David Maier
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Computer SciencePortland State UniversityPortlandUSA

Personalised recommendations