<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Spatial Galaxy &#187; ESRI</title>
	<atom:link href="http://spatialgalaxy.net/tag/esri/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://spatialgalaxy.net</link>
	<description>Exploring the Realms of GIS</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 30 Jan 2012 02:24:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>The Shapefile &#8211; Reports of My Deprecation have been Greatly Exaggerated</title>
		<link>http://spatialgalaxy.net/2010/01/04/the-shapefile-reports-of-my-deprecation-have-been-greatly-exaggerated/</link>
		<comments>http://spatialgalaxy.net/2010/01/04/the-shapefile-reports-of-my-deprecation-have-been-greatly-exaggerated/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 03:43:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gary Sherman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[ESRI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Source]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fgdb]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[shapefile]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://spatialgalaxy.net/?p=119</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The death of the shapefile has again been predicted&#8212;this time for 2010. The technical description of the format has been around for going on 12 years. In that time it has become a sort of lowest common denominator for data exchange. They&#8217;re everywhere. Making them go away is going to require a revolution of sorts. ESRI has been sounding the death knell for the shapefile for a while now. I agree that it isn&#8217;t a perfect format but it is nearly perfectly supported. If ESRI really wants the shapefile to go away, they will produce a fully open API for the File Geodatabase&#8212;one that can be used outside the Arc* realm. One that can be obtained and used at no cost or license fee. There is a raft of open source programmers waiting in the wings to code against it and provide support and interoperability for the open source GIS world. We&#8217;re waiting&#8230;]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The <a href='http://www.spatiallyadjusted.com/2009/12/31/5-predictions-geo-for-2010-and-5-things-that-wont-happen/'>death of the shapefile</a> has again been predicted&#8212;this time for 2010.</p>
<p>The <a href="http://www.esri.com/library/whitepapers/pdfs/shapefile.pdf">technical description</a> of the format has been around for going on 12 years. In that time it has become a sort of lowest common denominator for data exchange. They&#8217;re everywhere. Making them go away is going to require a revolution of sorts.</p>
<p>ESRI has been sounding the death knell for the shapefile for a while now. I agree that it isn&#8217;t a perfect format but it is nearly perfectly supported. </p>
<p>If ESRI really wants the shapefile to go away, they will produce a fully open API for the File Geodatabase&#8212;one that can be used outside the Arc* realm. One that can be obtained and used at no cost or license fee. </p>
<p>There is a raft of open source programmers waiting in the wings to code against it and provide support and interoperability for the open source GIS world.</p>
<p>We&#8217;re waiting&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://spatialgalaxy.net/2010/01/04/the-shapefile-reports-of-my-deprecation-have-been-greatly-exaggerated/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>2</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>

