As Chad and others point out, anyone (not just Google) can launch a service
to convert XML to JSON, proxy cross-domain requests, or unzip KMZ to KML. I
think Google should focus on things only Google can do: providing fast and
reliable access to geographic data such as tiles, geocodes, directions, and
so on.

On Thu, Jul 15, 2010 at 7:26 AM, Chad Killingsworth <
[email protected]> wrote:

> I have an XSLT file that will convert generic XML to JSON according to
> the specs at http://code.google.com/apis/gdata/docs/json.html - you
> only need to specify which elements can occur more than once in the
> file. It also handles JSON-IN-SCRIPT with a callback parameter.
>
> This would work great for KML - but would fail on KMZ.
>
> Using something like this, it's pretty easy for the KML owner to
> provide the JSON feed natively. If you'd like it, I'll post it
> publicly. I use it in a variety of projects.
>
> Chad Killingsworth
>
> On Jul 14, 2:00 pm, Garthan <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On Jul 14, 6:15 am, bratliff <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > On Jul 14, 12:13 am, Ben Appleton <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > > No plans at this point.  How would JSON would be any more useful than
> raw
> > > > KML?  Afterall you can load the KML directly into the browser,
> parsing and
> > > > modifying it as you wish.  What JSON schema would we use?
> >
> > > It would eliminate the proxy requirement.
> >
> > And that is a pretty direct boon I have a basic php proxy that I let
> > people snag
> > associated with my geoxml parser but its a pain for plenty of folk.
> >
> >   JSON is a much more compact
> >
> > > format than KML / XML.
> >
> > well not alot more compact intrinsically but it generally is a little
> > more compact even without too much work (the tag sizes are smaller but
> > they normally compress well due to duplication so the size gain is
> > smaller sometimes than it might seem .... but yes it is real.
> >
> > It is directly executable.  It does not
> >
> > > require a separate parsing step.
> >
> > Good particularly on that old dog IE whose xml parsing and handling
> > sucks.
> >
> > Extraneous elements could be
> >
> > > ignored.
> >
> > I like json to contain the folder information too and for me the
> > structure
> > of the kml isn't extraneous it conveys meaning about the data... its
> > one feature
> > kml has over GML in fact the groupings of things can be very
> > significant
> >
> > In general I agree lots of great features and most are the normal ones
> > associated with JSON
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Google Maps JavaScript API v3" group.
> To post to this group, send email to
> [email protected].
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> [email protected]<google-maps-js-api-v3%[email protected]>
> .
> For more options, visit this group at
> http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-js-api-v3?hl=en.
>
>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Google Maps JavaScript API v3" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-js-api-v3?hl=en.

Reply via email to