[georss] kml reference placemarks v/ georss?

[Ron Lake]

Hi,

I would argue that KML is not so much about features but rather is about
describing places and attributing information to places. In some way
this is similar to GeoRSS, which I see as attributing place to
documents/events/news stories. GML is about creating/defining geographic
things (features), which may have place.

R

-----Original Message-----
From: georss-bounces at lists.eogeo.org
[mailto:georss-bounces at lists.eogeo.org] On Behalf Of josh at oklieb.net
Sent: February 23, 2007 7:12 AM
To: Pat Cappelaere
Cc: georss at lists.eogeo.org; Raj Singh
Subject: Re: [georss] kml reference placemarks v/ georss?

Pat,

In thinking of the relative roles of these formats, they do overlap in
providing "featureness" to information, but have quite different intents
and strong points. GeoAtom is a light and very specific "news about"
format, while KML is very close to OWS Context in being able to contain
a
lot of information about setting up Google Earth (or similar blue marble
applications), including something close to full features as Gregor et
al
point out. Not surprising given some of the GML genes it carries.

One interesting characteristic of Atom is that there is both an
atom:link
to the Web resource being reported on, and an atom:content for more
involved or specialized HTML / XML representation. Various ideas are
being
tested for using the atom:content element, including inline GML or WFS
requests/filters. KML is yet another possibility to represent in a more
specialized form (but processable by both Google Earth and Google
Search)
what GeoAtom is providing news about.

Cheers,

Josh

> Raj,
>
> +1
> What do you have in mind?  How would a KML-enabled RSS feed look like?
> We might want to show some examples on the site.
> Pat.
>
>
>> From: Raj Singh <raj at rajsingh.org>
>> Date: Fri, 23 Feb 2007 02:06:27 -0500
>> To: <georss at lists.eogeo.org>
>> Subject: Re: [georss] kml reference placemarks v/ georss?
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> georss mailing list
>> georss at lists.eogeo.org
>> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> georss mailing list
> georss at lists.eogeo.org
> http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss
>

_______________________________________________
georss mailing list
georss at lists.eogeo.org
http://lists.eogeo.org/mailman/listinfo/georss