> Because the little towns all have the same weight with the geocoder. > "Paris" is always going to choose a capital city over a provincial > town, as the capital city has much more weight than the Kentucky > version.
That makes sense. Wikipedia works the same way. Search on Paris is going to bring up the capital city with a link to other "Paris's"...or would that be "Pari"? lol > You might think of stars: you can see many stars which are > all much of a muchness in a dark sky. Put the moon in the sky and you > can see that with only the brightest stars; put the sun there as well > and you can't see anything else. I am an amateur astronomer (used to be) so nice analogy. > The geocoder is an address geocoder, not a business geocoder (that's > Local Search). There aren't many addresses which contain the word > "Disney", what with it being a registered trademark, so it's probably > found its way into the geocoder's address data. "Sea" on the other > hand features in many addresses; and the geocoder doesn't geocode > business names. Ah. That also makes sense. I guess I got spoiled because I was finding all kinds of places that weren't really addresses.... For example, I was finding "Speakers' Corner". Which is a little area in London. However, now it disappeared?!?! So I guess it's always evolving. Now, I wonder if I can integrate Local Search in as well? hmmm... > > PS: The Version 3 Group is > athttp://groups.google.com/group/google-maps-js-api-v3/ > but I don't think the geocoder is any different as it's a server-side > process which I believe is shared between the two APIs. Thanks! -- 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.
