Thanks for the info. I see what you're saying and I suspected the same all along - I was really just exploring the idea to get an understanding if what I wanted to do was legit. I guess its time to enlighten the client to the realities of the world.
Maybe I'm getting a little off topic by asking this, but it seems like a good conclusion - is what I was describing permitted under any one of the Google 'commercial' licenses (I'm not sure what its called, Enterprise or Premier or whatever)? Or is the only alternative a direct mailing-list supplier of addresses? Thanks again Marcelo :) --Dan On Oct 21, 2:43 pm, Marcelo <[email protected]> wrote: > On Oct 21, 8:24 pm, DanMPP <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > what do you need "all addresses" for? > > > Just a requirement of the tool. They need that info for some business > > process that they do... > > _That_ is against the ToS. > You're only supposed to geocode addresses *for using them on a map*, > and not for other "business processes", and it is recommended that you > store them for efficiency, so as to avoid overloading Google's servers > with repeated identical queries. > > > In either case, I'm not about to tell them how to do their job, its > > just something they want. > > As the developer, it would be appropriate to advise your client about > how best to accomplish the task. That doesn't amount to telling them > how to do their job. :-) > > > > > The problem still remains > > though, as to how to get the addresses contained in the polygon > > without running "infinite" queries. Is there a function that returns > > only the GLatLngs with addresses attached to them? > > Yes, reverse geocoding does, as you already know, but your problem is > the number of queries that you want to make. They will likely get you > blocked because effectively, what you want to do is to scrape Google's > database for the area in question. > > Time for a redesign of the application, I think. :-) > > -- > Marcelo -http://maps.forum.nu > -- > > > That might work out > > if thats the case. If not, I'm stumped. Any thoughts? > > > --Dan > > > On Oct 21, 1:48 pm, Marcelo <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Oct 21, 6:45 pm, DanMPP <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > - is there an effective way to do this without running thousands of > > > > reverse geolocation queries, looping through all possible coordinates > > > > contained within the polygon? > > > > Define "all possible coordinates contained within the polygon". > > > Hint: There's an infinite number of points inside a polygon. > > > > What is your intended area of coverage? A city? A country? The world? > > > Those are very different scenarios. > > > > You might want to think about using predefined polygons, like > > > zipcodes, or counties. That would simplify the problem a lot. > > > Aside from that, what do you need "all addresses" for? > > > If you save your polygons to a database, then you can lookup what > > > polygon a given address belongs in, only if the address is relevant > > > for a delivery. You don't need information about the neighbours' > > > address. > > > > > I wouldn't be storing any > > > > of this information, just displaying it for immediate use. > > > > It is recommended that you do store it. > > > Addresses don't change latitude/longitude, so there is no need to look > > > up any given address more than once. > > > > -- > > > Marcelo -http://maps.forum.nu > > > -- > > > > > Any help you guys could provide would be great. Thanks. > > > > --Dan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps API" 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-api?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
