KML and atom:link
Jason Birch is right in wanting to use rel="alternate" in his KML atom:link, and the OGC KML spec is wrong in limiting us to "rel=related". Andrew Turner has written even more about what you can do with "alternate" links here. I remember commenting that the KML spec's public comment period was a bit short and ill-timed (Christmas 2007). Perhaps this error would have been caught otherwise?
Related: kml description considered harmful
Comments
Re: KML and atom:link
Author: Peter Rushforth
The OGC KML 2.2 schema allows atom:link rel="alternate" href="...", I think. Google Earth doesn't support hyperlinks with fragment identifiers as far as I can tell if they are not in the kml file it is processing, for example. The browser doesn't fly to the linked Placemark, but the file will open, at least. Cheers, PeterRe: KML and atom:link
Author: Sean
I don't think that XSD constrains @rel at all. I believe it was probably the intention of the KML spec writers to import all of atom:link and that the language in the OGC KML spec is just erroneous. If developers go to the Atom syntax spec to understand atom:link, they'll be fine.Re: KML and atom:link
Author: Jason Birch
I checked the schema too, and it didn't appear to place any restrictions. The only reason I ran into this (I don't make a habit of reading specifications) is that Galdos' KML validator picked it up.