I have a DB of locations, which is populated using two methods: 1) Incrementally, via user input.
2) Batch via uploaded file. For the incremental method, I use the Javascript api to geocode, because (a) It's the right way to do it, and (b) the risk of being over quota is spread over many IPs and has much lower volumes. For the Batch method, I use HTTP using PHP, because it's more suited toward populating a DB from a single IP. It has become very important to get like responses between the two Google maps query methods in terms of location Accuracy. The JS API method gives me something like the following: (I don't have the code in front of me.) ROOFTOP RANGE INTERP GEO CENTER APRROX UNKNOWN In the geometry->location_type field. However, the HTTP/PHP method gives me the Accuracy score, which is Unknown - Premise (0-9 respectively), as I recall. As I also gather in my study, the two accuracies are somewhat apples and oranges. The Accuracy score being input quality??, an the location_type being output quality? (Please correct me here!) I need to somehow reconcile the two of these, (i.e. They go into the same database after all), so there is a consistent meaning for the term "Accuracy". For instance if the Accuracy is RANGE INTERP or better, I can offer a StreetView as an option, otherwise there's little point if it's off a mile. And trying to use the API service for my batch processing is an abuse, (and likely to get my server black-listed??). A batch of 3k records is completely reasonable, but beyond the quota. Obviously, I'd like to be a good citizen! :-) Is there a equivalence table between the JS location_type and the HTTP Accuracy values returned from these two methods? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps JavaScript API v3" 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-js-api-v3?hl=en.
