I am seeing different locations for
16663 E Union Ave Aurora CO 80015
based on using either the city/state or zip code.
If I enter:
16663 E Union Ave 80015
the location is incorrect. The house number drops off and Ave changes
to Dr. The only hint that there was an error is the text "Placement
on map is approximate".
If I enter:
16663 E Union Ave Aurora CO
or
16663 E Union Ave Aurora CO 80015
the location is correct.
I am extremely surprised that a city would have to almost identically named roads: E Union Ave. and E Union Dr. That is a very poor naming strategy.
This poor strategy likely confuses Google Maps. (And I bet it confuses the USPS, UPS, and FedEx, too!) Yes, Google should try to address this. But two roads should NEVER be named so similarly.
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 4:19 AM, b <byronnn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am seeing different locations for > 16663 E Union Ave Aurora CO 80015 > based on using either the city/state or zip code.
> If I enter: > 16663 E Union Ave 80015 > the location is incorrect. The house number drops off and Ave changes > to Dr. The only hint that there was an error is the text "Placement > on map is approximate".
> If I enter: > 16663 E Union Ave Aurora CO > or > 16663 E Union Ave Aurora CO 80015 > the location is correct.
Street-address geocoders, as a general matter, have a difficult
problem in resolving incomplete addresses. And yes, that problem
includes distinguishing between different streets with the same base
name but different type suffixes ("St," "Ave," "Ct," etc.) It is
useless to complain about the way localities name their streets.
These are the facts on the ground, and the map providers, geocoders,
public-safety dispatchers, USPS, etc. have to deal wtih them.
Yes, Google's geocoder (which at least in part depends on data or
software it licenses from map providers) failed to resolve that
particular address correctly.
At least you got a warning message. Some batch-geocoders run a whole
set of addresses blind, the application just makes its best guess and
plots the point, and the human user never even gets to know that there
might be an error, or have the opportunity to fix the problem.
Usually this means correcting or completing the address upstream.
In this case, the USPS http://zip4.usps.com/zip4/welcome.jsp is able
to resolve the street address correctly, likely because its algorithm
is smart enough to cross-check by street-number range. E UNION DR has
no such address as 16663, but E UNION AVE does.
On Jul 29, 6:19 am, b <byronnn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I am seeing different locations for
> 16663 E Union Ave Aurora CO 80015
> based on using either the city/state or zip code.
> If I enter:
> 16663 E Union Ave 80015
> the location is incorrect. The house number drops off and Ave changes
> to Dr. The only hint that there was an error is the text "Placement
> on map is approximate".
> If I enter:
> 16663 E Union Ave Aurora CO
> or
> 16663 E Union Ave Aurora CO 80015
> the location is correct.
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:38 AM, NWT <nwt...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 7:35 AM, boomerbubba <rossev...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> It is >> useless to complain about the way localities name their streets.
> I couldn't disagree more. You clearly have not worked in the public > sector or civil engineering.
Could you imagine what would happen if someone who is unfamiliar with the area called 9-1-1 from a cell phone, requesting life and death emergency service?
"Help! Someone has been shot and needs an ambulance!"
"What is your location?"
"I'm not sure, exactly. But I know I'm on East Union...East Union...Street,..!"
"Sir, we don't have an East Union Street. We have East Union Avenue and Drive."
"I don't know which! Take your pick!"
Yikes...This is an EXTREMELY poor name choice by the city.
"Yikes...This is an EXTREMELY poor name choice by the city."
Which is actually a rather common in occurrence in localities. It is
part of the actual geography on the ground that map makers, geocoders
and geo-software developers have to deal with. It would also be
easier for them if all streets were laid out in square blocks and
named according to a rigorous grid system, or if no city ever used
the word "North" in a street name if it was not meant as a directional
prefix. But that is not how most cities got built, and resolving
street names is not easy.
Perhaps such remarks would be best directed to a forum for city
managers. This is a forum about a software tool. It is not useful to
engage in silly, far-fetched apologies for Google by trying to shift
blame to the city that named the streets. It is more useful to
discuss facts. (Of course, a Google-apologist-wannabee troll who has
colonized this forum might not care about that. So sad. That's part
of makes a troll a troll.)
The simple fact is that none of this excuses the particular problem
Google's geocoder had on this particular address. The Post Office can
find it, Yahoo can map it. Google got it wrong.
Just for perspective, it is also true that all street-address
geocoders have some issues, and none will geocode 100 percent of all
addresses successfully, because in general the underlying problems are
not easy. There are some addresses Google will find but Yahoo will
flub. Ditto for specialized geocoding service companies. I have also
seen addresses that the Post Office gets wrong.
On Jul 29, 10:44 am, NWT <nwt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:38 AM, NWT <nwt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 7:35 AM, boomerbubba <rossev...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> >> It is
> >> useless to complain about the way localities name their streets.
> > I couldn't disagree more. You clearly have not worked in the public
> > sector or civil engineering.
> Could you imagine what would happen if someone who is unfamiliar with
> the area called 9-1-1 from a cell phone, requesting life and death
> emergency service?
> "Help! Someone has been shot and needs an ambulance!"
> "What is your location?"
> "I'm not sure, exactly. But I know I'm on East Union...East Union...Street,..!"
> "Sir, we don't have an East Union Street. We have East Union Avenue and Drive."
> "I don't know which! Take your pick!"
> Yikes...This is an EXTREMELY poor name choice by the city.
It doesn't matter how a city names its streets. If Google can't
figure it out then it is Google's problem. USPS can find it. Yahoo
can find it. Google's third party data providers can find it. I can
find it with a paper map. So if Google can't find it then the city's
problem and they need to rename their streets? Hogwash. The software
needs to model the system. If there is a problem with the model, you
don't fix the system.
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:38 AM, NWT <nwt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 7:35 AM, boomerbubba <rossev...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> >> It is
> >> useless to complain about the way localities name their streets.
> > I couldn't disagree more. You clearly have not worked in the public
> > sector or civil engineering.
> Could you imagine what would happen if someone who is unfamiliar with
> the area called 9-1-1 from a cell phone, requesting life and death
> emergency service?
> "Help! Someone has been shot and needs an ambulance!"
> "What is your location?"
> "I'm not sure, exactly. But I know I'm on East Union...East Union...Street,..!"
> "Sir, we don't have an East Union Street. We have East Union Avenue and Drive."
> "I don't know which! Take your pick!"
> Yikes...This is an EXTREMELY poor name choice by the city.
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 12:26 PM, boomerbubba <rossev...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> "Yikes...This is an EXTREMELY poor name choice by the city."
> Which is actually a rather common in occurrence in localities. It is > part of the actual geography on the ground that map makers, geocoders > and geo-software developers have to deal with. It would also be > easier for them if all streets were laid out in square blocks and > named according to a rigorous grid system, or if no city ever used > the word "North" in a street name if it was not meant as a directional > prefix. But that is not how most cities got built, and resolving > street names is not easy.
> Perhaps such remarks would be best directed to a forum for city > managers.
I'm trying to explain to you WHY Google Maps is having difficulties. And if you are a resident, it is your civic responsibility to complain to the City Engineer. Too bad you cannot except either things.
This is a forum about a software tool. It is not useful to
> engage in silly, far-fetched apologies for Google by trying to shift > blame to the city that named the streets. It is more useful to > discuss facts. (Of course, a Google-apologist-wannabee troll who has > colonized this forum might not care about that. So sad. That's part > of makes a troll a troll.)
Do you really have to call people names? Is that how you should go about asking for help? Think about that. Think about that long and hard.
> The simple fact is that none of this excuses the particular problem > Google's geocoder had on this particular address. The Post Office can > find it, Yahoo can map it. Google got it wrong.
> Just for perspective, it is also true that all street-address > geocoders have some issues, and none will geocode 100 percent of all > addresses successfully, because in general the underlying problems are > not easy. There are some addresses Google will find but Yahoo will > flub. Ditto for specialized geocoding service companies. I have also > seen addresses that the Post Office gets wrong.
> On Jul 29, 10:44 am, NWT <nwt...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:38 AM, NWT <nwt...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 7:35 AM, boomerbubba <rossev...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> >> It is >> >> useless to complain about the way localities name their streets.
>> > I couldn't disagree more. You clearly have not worked in the public >> > sector or civil engineering.
>> Could you imagine what would happen if someone who is unfamiliar with >> the area called 9-1-1 from a cell phone, requesting life and death >> emergency service?
>> "Help! Someone has been shot and needs an ambulance!"
>> "What is your location?"
>> "I'm not sure, exactly. But I know I'm on East Union...East Union...Street,..!"
>> "Sir, we don't have an East Union Street. We have East Union Avenue and Drive."
>> "I don't know which! Take your pick!"
>> Yikes...This is an EXTREMELY poor name choice by the city.
On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 12:45 PM, b <byronnn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It doesn't matter how a city names its streets.
It most CERTAINLY does!
> If Google can't > figure it out then it is Google's problem. USPS can find it. Yahoo > can find it. Google's third party data providers can find it. I can > find it with a paper map.
Then why don't you go use those mappers and stop whining.
How would you feel if emergency service providers couldn't find you because of this unreasonable naming solution?
> So if Google can't find it then the city's > problem and they need to rename their streets? Hogwash. The software > needs to model the system. If there is a problem with the model, you > don't fix the system.
I am speaking from many years of civil engineering experience - something you clearly do not have.
> On Jul 29, 9:44 am, NWT <nwt...@gmail.com> wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:38 AM, NWT <nwt...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 7:35 AM, boomerbubba <rossev...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
>> >> It is >> >> useless to complain about the way localities name their streets.
>> > I couldn't disagree more. You clearly have not worked in the public >> > sector or civil engineering.
>> Could you imagine what would happen if someone who is unfamiliar with >> the area called 9-1-1 from a cell phone, requesting life and death >> emergency service?
>> "Help! Someone has been shot and needs an ambulance!"
>> "What is your location?"
>> "I'm not sure, exactly. But I know I'm on East Union...East Union...Street,..!"
>> "Sir, we don't have an East Union Street. We have East Union Avenue and Drive."
>> "I don't know which! Take your pick!"
>> Yikes...This is an EXTREMELY poor name choice by the city.
> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 12:45 PM, b <byronnn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > It doesn't matter how a city names its streets.
> It most CERTAINLY does!
> > If Google can't
> > figure it out then it is Google's problem. USPS can find it. Yahoo
> > can find it. Google's third party data providers can find it. I can
> > find it with a paper map.
> Then why don't you go use those mappers and stop whining.
> How would you feel if emergency service providers couldn't find you
> because of this unreasonable naming solution?
> > So if Google can't find it then the city's
> > problem and they need to rename their streets? Hogwash. The software
> > needs to model the system. If there is a problem with the model, you
> > don't fix the system.
> I am speaking from many years of civil engineering experience -
> something you clearly do not have.
> > How do you report this as a bug?
> Read the FAQ.
> > On Jul 29, 9:44 am, NWT <nwt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 8:38 AM, NWT <nwt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Tue, Jul 29, 2008 at 7:35 AM, boomerbubba <rossev...@austin.rr.com> wrote:
> >> >> It is
> >> >> useless to complain about the way localities name their streets.
> >> > I couldn't disagree more. You clearly have not worked in the public
> >> > sector or civil engineering.
> >> Could you imagine what would happen if someone who is unfamiliar with
> >> the area called 9-1-1 from a cell phone, requesting life and death
> >> emergency service?
> >> "Help! Someone has been shot and needs an ambulance!"
> >> "What is your location?"
> >> "I'm not sure, exactly. But I know I'm on East Union...East Union...Street,..!"
> >> "Sir, we don't have an East Union Street. We have East Union Avenue and Drive."
> >> "I don't know which! Take your pick!"
> >> Yikes...This is an EXTREMELY poor name choice by the city.
