12027+337 = 12364 suspiciously close is it doing a loop and
going back to try the Not Located again?
Just a thought.....
Chris Wagner
Stan Buck wrote:
Not sure what your point is. The GISDK line I gave was, of course,
part of
a much longer routine.
More:
The odd part is how GISDK vs manual is so different. The progress bars
look
identical with either method, but the results are different. The
original
MS Access table has 12027 records. When done by hand, the dialog box
reports 337 Records Not Located out of 12027. When run through the
GISDK
routine, the resulting layer has 12365 records (338 more than the
original
table!) of which 43 have no lat/long. If anyone could explain what
that
macro is doing, I'd appreciate it.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Armando Scalise" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 11:00 AM
Subject: Re: [Maptitude] Continued problems with Address Match macro
>
> Stan,
>
> I my experience, if you want to increase the hit rate when
geocoding wth
> Maptitude, you need to do some pre and post processing before
calling
> any of the Standard Interface Macros (""GISDK Locate Address" and
> "GISDK Address Match"). That means using some GISDK routines in
order
> to have a better control of the process.
>
> Armando
>
>
> Stan Buck wrote:
>
>>I have to ask this again because I never got an answer the
first time, but
>>the problem is growing.
>>
>>When we geocode our database, there are always some addresses
that are on
>>streets that are too new to be in Maptitude's Streets
database. If I
>>geocode the database manually, i.e. open the file, choose
>>Tools-->Locate-->Locate by Address, these addresses are
properly marked
>>Not
>>Found.
>>
>>But if I try to do it in GISDK code using the Address Match
macro:
>>
>>RunMacro("GISDK Address
>>Match",vw1+"|",{"recordID","address","zip",},"Streets",strDBPath,"Child
>>Care",)
>>
>>the macro seems to attempt to guess the location of the point.
They are
>>given incorrect lat/longs. Sometimes it's obvious what was
going on, i.e.
>>an address on Weeping Cherry was plotted on Cherry Lane, 2
miles away, but
>>usually it's not apparent what the program is doing.
>>
>>We would rather have these addresses Not Found than incorrectly
plotted.
>>How can I geocode with GISDK without this happening?
>>
>>Stan Buck
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
|
