[geomoose-psc] Google Geocoder

[Dan Little]

Should we:
a. Deliver 2.9.1 with Google.
b. Deliver 2.9.1 without any 'enabled' Geocoder (comment out the entry
in the mapbook) and write a quick "How To Enable The Googs".
c. Deliver 2.9.1 with an alternative geocoder to replace geocoder.us
and leave the google code dormant as it was in 2.9.

Aside:
I'm not sure which of a-c would necessitate switching to 2.10 but
these are all methods for addressing the same 'bug.'



On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Eli Adam <eadam at co.lincoln.or.us> wrote:
> There is this, https://mapzen.com/products/search/?lng=-124.01556&lat=44.66743&zoom=12
>  not certain on licensing but seems very unrestricted.
>
> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 8:03 AM, Dan Little <theduckylittle at gmail.com> wrote:
>> We could ship 2.9.1 with Google and do a next-step.  2.9.1, I think,
>> is basically ready for testing.
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:58 AM, James Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> It may be old school, but I didn't see any good alternatives mentioned
>>> though.
>>>
>>> 1. Violate Google TOS
>>>
>>> 2. Cripple the Demo, but let people add it back.  Also, removes it from
>>> regular testing.
>>>
>>> 3. Who needs geocoders anyway?  This might be OK for the parcel app users
>>> because they probably already have better local data anyway.  But it doesn't
>>> help anyone else.
>>>
>>> Also, this means the 2.9.0 on OSGeo Live should be fixed.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Jul 1, 2016 09:49, "Dan Little" <theduckylittle at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> geocoder.us was useful but the momentum for geocoding TIGER files in
>>>> Berkeley databases is not considered particularly modern.
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:48 AM, James Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>> > I think an email saying we noticed it was down and offering to help
>>>> > maintain
>>>> > it might be worthwhile.
>
> Yes, a nice courtesy.
>
>
>>>> >
>>>> > I guess my real question is if geocoder.us is still useful to the
>>>> > community
>>>> > or has the world moved on to something else (OSM)?  If it is useful to
>>>> > us
>>>> > and to others, we should look into helping maintain/support it.
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> > On Jul 1, 2016 09:37, "Dan Little" <theduckylittle at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >>
>>>> >> Schuyler Earl. Good luck.  It's like 12 projects ago for him.
>>>> >>
>>>> >> On Fri, Jul 1, 2016 at 9:35 AM, James Klassen <klassen.js at gmail.com>
>>>> >> wrote:
>>>> >> > Do we know who was running geocoder.us?  Maybe we could get it fixed.
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> >
>>>> >> > On Jul 1, 2016 05:03, "Dan Little" <theduckylittle at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Hey Folks,
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> geocoder.us appears to be defunct. The website doesn't load and
>>>> >> >> there
>>>> >> >> certainly does not appear to be any geocodes being returned.  This
>>>> >> >> was
>>>> >> >> our default geocoder.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> The other geocoder with which we have code is the Google Geocoder.
>>>> >> >> I'm fixing it up right now to work (it wasn't) and to also include
>>>> >> >> an
>>>> >> >> appropriate credit/disclaimer.  However, I'm a bit worried as we are
>>>> >> >> probably running afoul the Google TOS.  I see a few options:
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> 1. Run with it. We're a very small fish in a very large pond.
>>>> >> >> 2. Do not include a Geocoder by default but provide instructions for
>>>> >> >> adding back in the Google geocoder (including setting an API key).
>>>> >> >> This runs ... "less" afoul the TOS depending on how you read them.
>
> Running a demo of geocoding in GeoMoose seems fine as a demonstration.
> We probably shouldn't distribute a working demo with an API key.
> Right now, it would take work to run a different demo than what we
> distribute as the demo.  So that makes a case for remove it from the
> demo.
>
> With something like this, it seems providing directions and maybe an
> example (but not working with an API key) is the correct path.  That
> allows the user to evaluate the TOS and whether they are appropriate
> for them.
>
>
>>>> >> >> 3. Remove all the geocoders.  They're all broken.  Folks may not
>>>> >> >> like
>>>> >> >> to see the code disappear.
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Long term (and I will file a ticket to this regard) we should
>>>> >> >> probably
>>>> >> >> write our own Geocoder instructions or write a crappy
>>>> >> >> DIY/off-the-shelf-libs geocoder that works with the default parcel
>>>> >> >> data.
>
> Let's avoid writing geocoders, even lame parcel ones.
>
> Best regards, Eli
>
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Cheers,
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> -Duck
>>>> >> >>
>>>> >> >> Reference tickets:
>>>> >> >> - https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/issues/150
>>>> >> >> - https://github.com/geomoose/geomoose/issues/152
>>>> >> >> _______________________________________________
>>>> >> >> geomoose-psc mailing list
>>>> >> >> geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
>>>> >> >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc
>> _______________________________________________
>> geomoose-psc mailing list
>> geomoose-psc at lists.osgeo.org
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/geomoose-psc