I wanted first to address the requirement for local search to create a stratum of objective information. If we succeed in this, the social networking tools you mention will be that much more compelling.

I also describe a mode where the IDYP (Internet Derived Yellow Pages) supplies its metadata to search applications, such as Google. You can think of the IDYP as footnotes attached to web pages with local content. This way, vetted local data automatically participates in the innovation that Google and others bring to web search. It's this insight that allows us to combine structured and mediated content with unstructured web content. I think it is a powerful approach, and not just for local search.

'D', I am not sure what Google's Autolink has to do with trusted authorities. Google is not a trusted authority from the perspective of the IDYP. The concern for what Google might yet do with Autolink isjustified, and it makes sense to discuss the legal issues it raises. On the other hand, the text that Google currently annotates are forms of metadata. For example, there is a 1-1 mapping between an address and a location on a map. An address is a shorthand, a synonym, for (a location on) a map. If a user is interested but unfamiliar with an address, she will almost certainly want to view a map of it. Shouldn't search engines remove the tedium of pursuing information? Especially when the annotation involves no semantic or substantive alteration of the content? Some text already has a specific and unambiguous denotation. Perhaps by delineating the set of these, it will help determine what search engines should and shouldn't touch.

You have a good point on chambers of commerce. Several business acquaintances admonished me for my naiveté in suggesting they could play a significant role aggregating local content. In a sense, I used them as placeholders.

One of the functions of "trusted authorities," as I call them, is to provide tools that enable small and medium enterprises (SMEs) to create Internet content. I used chambers of commerce and trade associations as examples to indicate that the role of trusted authorities can be assumed by already existing organizations. But there are other candidates, too. Examples include "hyperlocal" sites such as http://www.northwestvoice.com/, town and municipal offices, local newspapers, even YP publishers.

Local content, including local business content, is open in the sense that it is not owned by any aggregator. The natural evolution of the Internet will ensure that businesses themselves directly control their information on the Internet. Trusted authorities will just make it easier for all businesses to distribute timely, consistent, and accurate information. I think of local search as similar to Google News. Instead of "4,500 news sources updated continuously," there are 4,500, or 10,000, or 100,000, trusted authorities, updated continuously. Yellow Pages with no latency, and arbitrarily detailed content.

Specifically on chambers of commerce, perhaps I am not quite that naive. For one, many chambers have an Internet presence, and do at least an adequate job of presenting their members' information. Secondly, to remain relevant, or become more relevant, chambers, too, will need to evolve as the Internet changes how local information is disseminated.

In addition to speaking about Internet-derived and Off-line derived content, however, I added a third type- user generated content. User being defined as a business owner, a customer, or even a competitor. I feel that user generated content may be the most important trend specifically in terms of the new algorithmic based local search utilities and must be taking into consideration when addressing local content. A topic that maybe we can take up over a drink one evening. In the interim, in addition to this resource, I invite you to stop by the local search forum on webmasterworld.com where I moderate. We can use more authoritative opinions to augment some lively discussions on the topic of local search.

No doubt chambers and trade organizations represent unique points of distribution/contact for aggregated pools of local SMEs. As such organizations (even those designated as not for profit) operate, however, as businesses themselves, SME membership is far from universal (barriers to membership discussed in prior post).

As not for profit organizations engage in tiered promotion of members according to level of monetary contributions, similar to “pay for (better) placement” in search engine marketing, “trusted authorities” may actually be sponsored authorities.

Google’s Autolink philosophy also belies a notion of “trusted authority”:
Eric Goldman states in his Technology & Marketing Law blog, “From a legal standpoint, AutoLink looks questionable. The tool modifies publisher’s web pages by adding hypertext links without the publisher's consent. While this modification isn’t a huge change, I could still see some (many?) courts treating them as unauthorized derivative works. Honestly, it seems like a fairly routine copyright infringement. Google appears to be trying to position this as a situation where it’s merely acting as an agent for user instructions, but I’ve just recently blogged on how courts frequently slice through that argument pretty quickly.”
http://blog.ericgoldman.org/archives/2005/02/googles_autolin.htm

He's more focused on the consumer experience overall.

He says that Vicinity and Northern Light already found an effective approach ("geosearch") and that the patent is now owned by Microsoft.

We'll see if Microsoft does anything with it. I'm assured they're going to do some things with local soon.

http://www.micropersuasion.com/2005/02/google_gets_awa.html

Question: who "owns" the traffic?

Himmelstein sees his methodology/functionality yielding a more complete local product (from a consumer point of view). He's less involved (for now) with the monetization strategy. Only in a vague, conceptual sense . . .perhaps there is an analogy.