Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

In+ersec+ion for Spatial People

Google's KML Standardization Poll Results and New Poll

posted by Satri on Friday March 30, @03:32PM   Printer-friendly   Email story  Permalink  Trackback URI  Slashdotthis  Diggthis  Del.icio.us
from the how-do-you-gain-control-of-standards? dept.
Announcements Google Open Geospatial Consortium Polls
Our last poll about the potential standardization of Google's KML by the OGC provided interesting results: out of about 120 votes, 54% of users believe the OGC should in fact hold the standard for Google's KML. 6% believe it should be standardized but not by the OGC, while 26% believe Google should keep control over KML. 11% answered maybe or that it does not matter. The new poll is about your excitement provided by your geospatial projects, which is somehow related to this previous one.

Related Stories

Industry: OGC Standardizing Google’s KML Format? 1 comment [+]
Raj Singh discuss on his blog the Open Geospatial Consortium efforts to standardize Google's KML format. From the post: "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."
Industry: Raj Singh on KML and the OGC [+]
Raj Singh shares his thoughts in two entries about KML and the OGC. See the few previous stories below to get the context. From the former entry: "First of all, there’s a widespread misconception that KML is a data format. This viewpoint doesn’t do justice to the complex problems geospatial data encodings solve, and just as importantly sells short the elegant way KML tackles a different need in the market. [...] First of all, KML is a highly successful format whose design and features have been proven in the pressure cooker of the marketplace. We do not want to damage that legacy. This new OGC Best Practices paper lays out KML 2.1 as the basis of our work. [...] The OWS-5 Testbed has a thread devoted to experimentation with KML, and is designed to spur the development of new tools to create and share these new experimental versions of KML."
Industry: Microsoft Virtual Earth to Support Google's KML Format [+]
The Geothough blog informs us Microsoft has plan to support Google's kml format in Virtual Earth. From the blog: "[...] in the Microsoft "vendor spotlight" presentation which just finished, the speaker said that Virtual Earth will support the ability to display KML in a September / October release this year. [...] so I think this is a very welcome announcement (assuming it's correct), which can only cement KML's position as a de facto standard (I don't think Microsoft could have stopped KML's momentum, but if they had released a competing format it would have been an unfortunate distraction)." Don't forget Google's KML is slowly becoming an OGC standard.
Technology: KML 3 and KML-related News 2 comments [+]
Numerous geoblogs discussed KML lately, here's some of them. The High Earth Orbit provides four informative entries on the "KML 3" format: a discussion on the next version of KML, the Core module, the styling module and the metadata module. Ogle Earth also provides some more links on KML 3 and a Firefox extension to show KML data directly in the browser. Finally, Spatially Adjusted display the KML Home Companion 3.0.2 just released and discuss the demo of Arc2Earth V2, the tool to publish ArcGIS data to Google Earth. Make sure you're aware of previous stories below about the standardization of Google's KML by the Open Geospatial Consortium.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Google's KML Standardization Poll Results and New Poll | Log In/Create an Account | Top | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.