Well, I guess that was careless of me. In my actual site when I checked for other results I was using a different example and there was only the one result (you can try 'Lakeshore Rd', then 'Lakeshore Rd, Mississauga' and see), so I didn't check when I created the demo and suggested the 'Queen St' example.
In any case, I still don't see how a not very long street in a small town would be considered "more relevant" than the streets in the larger cities actually inside the bounds, or even a major street in the largest city in the country which is actually closer to bounds and doesn't even make it to the list. In the Queen St case, of the 3 actually within the bounds, only one even makes it to the results list at number 3. And it's not just this one street, I have other examples where a major street within the bounds is not returned at all, so checking the bounds explicitly as suggested wouldn't help (see 'Lakeshore Rd' above). This just doesn't make sense to me. The only way I can get it to return actually relevant results is a hack: I append the city name to the end of the address string if it is not there already. Can Google provide some insight into how their 'relevance' algorithm works? Because it seems a bit wacky to me... -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps JavaScript API v3" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/google-maps-js-api-v3/-/8_fG3DfIyqsJ. 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.
