Sorry...I forgot one point. There should be a date in the location record to indicate when the geo-code was set for that location. That way, a "current" location set today can easily be re-evaluated in 10 years as an old location that needs to be re-verified.
On , Ron Taylor <[email protected]> wrote: Jay, It looks like you're on the same highway that I've been down. When you report the location from the Master Locations List, include the "L" column letter so we can tell where the geo-code may have originated. An "L" means it came from the Geo-Database. A "V" means it came from the Virtual Earth maps (now called Bing maps). The "?" means that Bing maps could not resolve it when it was queried. The blank is supposed to mean that the location has not been looked up in any geo-code table yet. The minus sign means the user told Legacy not to geo-code the location. Then the adventure begins. You would assume that if a location were resolved by a geo-code lookup that it would be the actual location. As you pointed out, that is not always the case. I too have found locations with Bing maps that were in the middle of a lake or out in the ocean. Some locations that were resolved were on another continent. One bug that persists in Legacy is the over-ride that happens when a location that has already been geo-coded by the geo-database is looked up in Bing maps. The "L" is simply replaced by the "V" without any interaction with the user. And if a location with "V" is looked up in the geo-database, the "V" is not changed to "L". If more geo-code tables are introduced, this behavior must be corrected. The second thing that really needs to be done is a way to get the geo-code tables corrected when they are known to be wrong. The geo-database appears to have this capability but I can't remember when it has ever been used and the current version has removed reference to the update possibility. Bing maps are accessed through the internet and I don't know if any protocol exists for updating them. A final bug that probably will never be fixed is the display of the stick pin on a location. If you were to use your own map and stick pins, you would logically push the pin into the map with the point of the pin to indicate the location. Look at where the point of the stick pin is compared to where the location is on the Legacy maps. It does not matter how much you zoom. The point is not "pointing" to the location. With all of that, there is only one tag field in the Master Locations table. It can be used for some advantage but tools are lacking. When combining files, it is a good idea to set all the location tags for the master file, clear the tags for the import file, then after finishing your merge, you can check out the remaining un-tagged locations to see if any of them could be geo-coded or otherwise corrected. Then with some editing, they might merge with some of the tagged locations. It would be nice if Legacy could highlight the un-tagged locations so they would stand out when viewing the list. As far as geo-coding in bulk, that would be a dream. But it would be interesting if a Master Locations table could be verified against a known to be accurate geo-code table and set the tags or verified flags based on exact matches. Then again have some highlighting tools to show those that did not match at all or were close but not exact. Read elsewhere what I've described about time sensitive location names. It can be done but not in the current version. And that leaves the "location modifiers" that need attention too. Ron Taylor On Thursday, July 31, 2014 5:23 PM, Jay 1FamilyTree <[email protected]> wrote: Has anyone found a way to review large numbers of Place Location Geo-Coded placement without having to do one location at a time? I have almost 10,000 places and I am constantly finding Geo -Code errors. For example I have two locations in my list Alban, South Dakota 44.4361381666667 -100.230491666667 Alban, Grant, South Dakota 44.6187705555556 -89.2845230555556 Yes, these should be merged, but they make a great example here Legacy Geo-coded the them as listed above. The first one, Alban, South Dakota points to center of the state and has the same coordinates that is used by the state generic South Dakota 44.4361416666667 -100.230451111111 In other words the geo coding did not find the correct place except to place the pin at the center of the state, which would be OK IF there was some disclaimer or notation somewhere. The second one is geo-coded to Alban, Portage County, WISCONSIN Why, is Geo coding setting wrong places?? (According to Google the coordinates for Alban, South Dakota are 45.1952395,-96.546404) With no tool to at least review the places in some sort of batch (like maybe 25 places on a page each with a small map of the geo-coded place. At least then I might have picked up that one of these was pointing to wisconsin and not South Dakota. One at a time review is just not a viable option. Anyone have any workable solutions? Thanks in advance for any help. Jay Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp Legacy User Group guidelines: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Etiquette.asp Archived messages after Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Archived messages from old mail server - before Nov. 21 2009: http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ Online technical support: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/Help.asp Follow Legacy on Facebook (http://www.facebook.com/LegacyFamilyTree) and on our blog (http://news.LegacyFamilyTree.com). To unsubscribe: http://www.LegacyFamilyTree.com/LegacyLists.asp
