Multimedia Tools and Applications

, Volume 73, Issue 3, pp 1777–1793 | Cite as

Multimedia applications for playing with digitized theater performances

  • Marc Caillet
  • Cécile RoisinEmail author
  • Jean Carrive


This article presents a multimedia production chain that specializes in semantically annotated digitized theater performances. Semantic annotations—we prefer the term descriptions—are expressed in a description language that combines object-oriented features, taxonomical inheritance and temporal aggregations. The descriptions that are produced from several types of content related to the same theater play are synchronized at several levels of granularity providing rich relationships between the narrative structure of the text of the play and the narrative structure of the digitized theater performances. Two applications for multimedia access and navigation are presented in this paper, namely Dual Players, a navigation application that allows to synchronously play acts and scenes of two recordings; and Synthesizer that produces a raw publication of a new audiovisual document on the basis of the recordings.


Semantic annotation Temporal segmentation Theater performance Multimedia application 



Part of this work has been supported by the European Commission under contract FP-020726, Knowledge Space of semantic inference for automatic annotation and retrieval of multimedia content (K-Space).


  1. 1.
    Allen JF (1983) Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals. Commun ACM 26–11:832–843CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Arndt R, Troncy R, Staab S, Hardman L, Vacura M (2007) COMM: Designing a well-founded multimedia ontology for the web. In: Aberer K, Choi K-S, Noy N, Allemang D, Lee K-I, Nixon LJB, Golbeck J, Mika P, Maynard D, Mizoguchi R, Schreiber G, Cudre-Mauroux P (eds) ASWC 2007 and ISWC 2007. LNCS, vol 4825. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 30–43Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Artale A, Franconi E et al (1996) Part-whole relations in object-centered systems: an overview. Data Knowl Eng 20:347–383CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Aubert O, Champin PA, Prié Y (2006) Integration of semantic web technology in an annotation- based hypervideo system. In: Proceedings of Workshop on Semantic Web Annotations for Multimedia (SWAMM’06), EdinburghGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Aubert O, Prié Y (2005) Advene: active reading through hypervideo. In: Proceedings of ACM Conference on Hypertext and Hypermedia, pp 235–244, Salzburg, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Auffret G, Carrive J, Chevet O, Dechilly T, Ronfard R (1999) Audiovisual-based hypermedia authoring: Using structured representations for efficient access to av documents. In: Proceedings of ACM Hypertext’99, Darmstadt, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bailer W, Schallauer P (2006) The detailed audiovisual profile: Enabling interoperability between MPEG-7 based systems. In: Proceedings of 12th Multimedia Modeling Conference, Beijing, China, pp 217–224Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Beaudoin V, Yvon F (1996) The Metrometer: a tool for analysing French verse. Literary and Linguistic Computing 11(1):23–32Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bloehdorn S, Petridis K, Saathoff C, Simou N, Tzouvaras V, Avrithis Y, Handschuh S, Kompatsiaris Y, Staab S, Strintzis MG (2005) Semantic annotation of images and videos for multimedia analysis. In: Gómez-Pérez A, Euzenat J (ed) The semantic web: research and applications: Proceedings of the Second European Semantic Web Conference, ESWC 2005, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, May 29-June 1, 2005. Springer, Berlin--Heidelberg, Germany, pp 592–607Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Caillet M, Carrive J, Roisin C, Yvon F (2007) Engineering Multimedia applications on the basis of multi-structured descriptions of audiovisual contents. In: Proceedings of the int. workshop on Semantically Aware Document Processing and Indexing, ACM, pp 31–40Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Berg M, van Kreveld M, OvermarsM, Schwarzkopf O (2000) Computational geometry, Second Revised Edition. Springer-Verlag. Section 10.1: Interval Trees, pp. 212–217Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Garcia R, Celma O (2005) Semantic integration and retrieval of multimedia metadata. In: Proceedings of the 2nd European Workshop on the Integration of Knowledge, Semantic and Digital MediaGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Glass, J, Hazen T, Cyphers S, Malioutov I, Barzilay R (2006) Progress in spoken lecture processing. In: Proceedings of the Iint. Conference on Spoken Language Processing, PittsburghGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gravier G, Yvon F, Jacob B, Bimbot F (2002) Sirocco, un système ouvert de reconnaissance de la parole. In: Proccedings of JEP’02, NancyGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hardman L, Obrenovi Ž, Nack F, Kerhervé B, Piersol K (2008) Canonical processes of semantically annotated media production. Multimed Syst 14:327–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hauglid JO, Heggland J (2008) Savanta—search, analysis, visualisation and navigation of temporal annotations. Multimed Tools Appl 40–2:183–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hobbs JR, Pan F (2006) Time Ontology in OWL, W3C Working Draft 27 September 2006,
  18. 18.
    Hunter J (2001) Adding multimedia to the semantic web—building an MPEG-7 ontology. In: Proceedings of the 1st int. Semantic Web Working Symposium SWWS’01, StanfordGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Jewell MO et al. (2005) OntoMedia: An ontology for the representation of heterogeneous media, In Proceedings of the Multimedia Information Retrieval workshop, SIGIR, BrazilGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Knublauch H. et al. (2006) A semantic web primer for object-oriented software developers, W3C Working Group Note 9,
  21. 21.
    Koide S, Takeda H (2006) OWL-full reasoning from an object oriented perspective. The Semantic Web – Asian Semantic Web Conf., ASWC2006, LNCS 4185, pp 263–277Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu KY, Chen HY (2005) Exploring media correlation and synchronization for navigated hypermedia documents. In: Proceedings of the 13th annual ACM conference on Multimedia, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Madhwacharyula CL, Davis M, Mulhem P, Kankanhalli MS (2006) Metadata handling: a video perspective. ACM TOMCCAP 2(4):358–388Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    McGuinness DL, van HarmelenF (2004) OWL web ontology language overview, W3C Recommendation 10 February 2004,
  25. 25.
    Pan F, Hobbs JR (2005) Temporal Aggregates in OWL-Time. In: Proceedings of the 18th int. Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society conference, FLAIRS-2005, Clearwater Beach, Florida, AAAI Press, pp 560–565Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Ronfard R, Thuong TT (2003) A framework for aligning and indexing movies with their script. In: Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Multimedia and Expo, BaltimoreGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Troncy R, Bailer W, Hausenblas M, Schlatte R (2006) Enabling multimedia metadata interoperability by defining formal semantics of MPEG-7 profiles. In: Proceedings of the int. Conference on Semantic and Digital Media Technologies, Athens, pp 41–55Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Troncy R, Carrive J, Lalande S, Poli JP (2004) A motivating scenario for designing an extensible audio-visual description language. In: Proceedings of CORIMEDIA’04, SherbrookeGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Tsinaraki C, Polydoros P, Christodoulakis S (2004) Integration of OWL ontologies in MPEG-7 and TV-anytime compliant semantic indexing. In: Proceedings of the 16th int. conference on Advanced Information Systems Eng. (CAiSE), pp.398–413Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Vanhaesebrouck K (2007) Digital heritage and performance. In: Image [&] Narrative - ISSN 1780-678X, Open Humanities Press,

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of Grenoble Alpes, LIG INRIA / INASt-IsmierFrance
  2. 2.University of Grenoble Alpes, LIG INRIASt-IsmierFrance
  3. 3.INABry-sur-MarneFrance

Personalised recommendations