On Oct 29, 3:05 pm, Jonathan del Strother <[email protected]> wrote: > > Recently, the service seems to have changed : for example, looking up > (51.501000,-0.077958) used to return a series of placemarks with > accuracy ranging from 1 to 8, and we'd be able to figure out that the > general area was Southwark, London. It now returns 9 placemarks, all > of which have an accuracy of 8 or 9, which seems too detailed to > reliably get location areas from.
Reverse geocoding finds *addresses* from a location. So it does the best it can to do that. > Is there any way of requesting lower accuracies? What you might be able to do is loop through the placemarks and use the first LocalityName, which is Camberwell for your example. That's a bit inaccurate in this case; it's nowhere near Camberwell! If there isn't a LocalityName, then taking the first part of AddressLine may suffice [up to the first comma]; that returns Bermondsey, which is better. Or: find a postcode which is returned in the results, like SE1 2, and then geocode that. That still comes up with a LocalityName of Camberwell, but SubAdministrativeAreaName of Southwark. Andrew --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ 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 -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
