Roy Williams wrote:
> The common denominator between the two efforts is the KML language,
> whose definition is now dominated by the geospatial community. If
> KML is to become a standard interchange format in astronomy also,
> it would be good if the astronomical community had a seat at the
> table when future versions are defined.
I think we can virtually guarantee that KML is going to become a standard in the astronomical community. It needs some extension, but crucially these extensions have to be kept simple and (crucially I think) light weight (and if possible useful outside astronomy).
Google has given us a new IVOA standard, it's KML, and we'd better get used to the idea. Possibly the IVOA should accept the status quo and officially adopt it. It might give us a (very) little bit more leverage.
Al. Received on 2008-01-22Z14:45:30