[georss] kml reference placemarks v/ georss?

[sgillies at frii.com]

> disclosure: I'm on OGC staff and right in the middle of the KML->OGC
> process
>
> On Feb 22, 2007, at 1:18 PM, Sean Gillies wrote:
>> A little KML in the atom:content elements of my GeoRSS feeds won't
>> hurt
>> anybody, and gets me by until we have a standards-based index.
>
> I think that's the right way to think about this.
>
> And one crucial point that I think a lot of people miss is the legal
> intellectual property aspect. Bringing KML into OGC isn't just about
> what features end up in that XML format. It's just as much about
> making sure the format is royalty-free to use forever. We all know
> the Google mantra is "don't be evil" (and the people I know there
> completely live up to the mantra), but OGC standardization means you
> don't have to take their word for it.
>
> So by standardizing KML in OGC, even if people don't get all the
> features in there they may like to see, at least you will know you
> can build innovative applications and information services around KML
> without fear of getting a cease-and-desist in the mail some day.
>
> ---
> Raj
>

Does anybody know if Yahoo has any plans to spatially index the Web? The
company has a fair investment in GeoRSS already -- would they be likely to
continue with GeoRSS or switch to KML? Is anybody working on an open
search engine that targets GeoRSS? (I'd like to be part of that effort.)

Back to Mike's question: if other search engines target KML only, GeoRSS
is probably a dead-end.

Cheers,
Sean