What Is Wrong with Digital Documents? A Conceptual Model for Structural Cross-Media Content Composition and Reuse

  • Beat Signer
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 6412)


Many of today’s digital document formats are strongly based on a digital emulation of printed media. While such a paper simulation might be appropriate for the visualisation of certain digital content, it is generally not the most effective solution for digitally managing and storing information. The oversimplistic modelling of digital documents as monolithic blocks of linear content, with a lack of structural semantics, does not pay attention to some of the superior features that digital media offers in comparison to traditional paper documents. For example, existing digital document formats adopt the limitations of paper documents by unnecessarily replicating content via copy and paste operations, instead of digitally embedding and reusing parts of digital documents via structural references. We introduce a conceptual model for structural cross-media content composition and highlight how the proposed solution not only enables the reuse of content via structural relationships, but also supports dynamic and context-dependent document adaptation, structural content annotations as well as the integration of arbitrary non-textual media types. We further discuss solutions for the fluid navigation and cross-media content publishing based on the proposed structural cross-media content model.


Document Format Structural Reference Structural Link Portable Document Format Digital Document 
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.
    Bush, V.: As We Think. Atlantic Monthly 176(1), 101–108 (1945)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Nelson, T.H.: Literary Machines. Mindful Press (1982)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Engelbart, D.C., English, W.K.: A Research Center for Augmenting Human Intellect. In: Proceedings of AFIPS Joint Computer Conferences, San Francisco, USA, pp. 395–410 (December 1968)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nelson, T.: Geeks Bearing Gifts: How the Computer World Got This Way. Mindful Press (2009)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Phelps, T.A., Wilensky, R.: The Multivalent Browser: A Platform for New Ideas. In: Proceedings of DocEng 2001, ACM Symposium on Document Engineering, Atlanta, USA, pp. 58–67 (November 2001)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Collins, A., Apted, T., Kay, J.: Tabletop File System Access: Associative and Hierarchical Approaches. In: Proceedings of Tabletop 2007 Second Annual IEEE International Workshop on Horizontal Interactive Human-Computer Systems (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Krottmaier, H., Maurer, H.: Transclusions in the 21st Century. Universal Computer Science 7(12), 1125–1136 (2001)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Christensen, B.G., Hansen, F.A., Bouvin, N.O.: Xspect: Bridging Open Hypermedia and XLink. In: Proceedings of WWW 2003, 12th International World Wide Web Conference, Budapest, Hungary, pp. 490–499 (May 2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Koivunen, M.R.: Semantic Authoring by Tagging with Annotea Social Bookmarks and Topics. In: Proceedings of SAAW 2006, 1st Semantic Authoring and Annotation Workshop, Athens, Greece (November 2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Miller, F.P., Vandome, A.F., McBrewster, J.: Office Open XML. Alphascript Publishing (2009)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nürnberg, P.J., Schraefel, M. C.: Relationships Among Structural Computing and Other Fields. Journal of Network and Computer Applications 26(1), 11–26 (2003)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    McGuffin, M.J., Schraefel, M. C.: A Comparison of Hyperstructures: Zzstructures, mSpaces, and Polyarchies. In: Proceedings of Hypertext 2004, 15th ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, Santa Cruz, USA, pp. 153–162 (2004)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rivera, G., Norrie, M.C.: OMX-FS: An Extended File System Architecture Based on a Generic Object Model. In: Weck, W., Gutknecht, J. (eds.) JMLC 2000. LNCS, vol. 1897, pp. 161–174. Springer, Heidelberg (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Signer, B.: Fundamental Concepts for Interactive Paper and Cross-Media Information Spaces. Books on Demand GmbH (May 2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Signer, B., Norrie, M.C.: As We May Link: A General Metamodel for Hypermedia Systems. In: Parent, C., Schewe, K.-D., Storey, V.C., Thalheim, B. (eds.) ER 2007. LNCS, vol. 4801, pp. 359–374. Springer, Heidelberg (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Norrie, M.C.: An Extended Entity-Relationship Approach to Data Management in Object-Oriented Systems. In: Elmasri, R.A., Kouramajian, V., Thalheim, B. (eds.) ER 1993. LNCS, vol. 823, pp. 390–401. Springer, Heidelberg (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kobler, A., Norrie, M.C.: OMS Java: A Persistent Object Management Framework. In: Java and Databases. Hermes Penton Science, pp. 46–62 (May 2002)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Signer, B., Norrie, M.C.: An Architecture for Open Cross-Media Annotation Services. In: Vossen, G., Long, D.D.E., Yu, J.X. (eds.) WISE 2009. LNCS, vol. 5802, pp. 387–400. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Beat Signer
    • 1
  1. 1.Vrije Universiteit BrusselBrusselsBelgium

Personalised recommendations