You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
when using geolocation we get a good city wide boundary which we use to weight the results coming back from the auto complete google places box. when we do a manual location entry instead of geolocation we don't seem to get any boundary, so the auto complete box results aren't weighted.
possible solutions:
i am overlooking something and we are getting boundary info back, or there is an easy way to do so
bind the auto complete box to the map area, but only when manually entered
always do this (which may work better, i'm just not sure if the weight is binary or gradual)
binary vs gradual - if you set boundaries, does it only give a set weight to places inside those boundaries and then everything outside of it is the same, whether it's 1 or 100 miles? if so, then this would not be very useful, but if it is gradual, then we should always just bind it to the map as it would be better than just setting the city as the boundary.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
when using geolocation we get a good city wide boundary which we use to weight the results coming back from the auto complete google places box. when we do a manual location entry instead of geolocation we don't seem to get any boundary, so the auto complete box results aren't weighted.
possible solutions:
binary vs gradual - if you set boundaries, does it only give a set weight to places inside those boundaries and then everything outside of it is the same, whether it's 1 or 100 miles? if so, then this would not be very useful, but if it is gradual, then we should always just bind it to the map as it would be better than just setting the city as the boundary.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: