Andrew is correct as long as you implement it client and not server side. See http://code.google.com/apis/maps/articles/geocodestrat.html where it defines the following:
Geocoding is the process of converting addresses (like "1600 Amphitheatre Parkway, Mountain View, CA") into geographic coordinates (like latitude 37.423021 and longitude -122.083739), which you can use to place markers or position the map. The Google Maps API Family provides two approaches to geocoding: 1. Client-side geocoding, which is executed in the browser, generally in response to user action. The Google Maps JavaScript API V3 provides classes that make the requests for you. This approach is described in the Maps API for JavaScript documentation<http://code.google.com/apis/maps/documentation/javascript/services.html> and the Maps Flash API documentation<http://code.google.com/apis/maps/documentation/flash/services.html#Geocoding> . 2. HTTP server-side geocoding, which allows your server to directly query Google's servers for geocodes. Typically, this is integrated with other code. that is running server-side, and then used to generate a map. Server-side geocoding is described in the Geocoding API documentation<http://code.google.com/apis/maps/documentation/geocoding/index.html> . So if you implement it client side as this link explains, then you would be okay as long as a single client isn't using more than the limited requests per day. It really depends on your client in that case. However, if you need your clients to have access to more a premier license is always an option for you. Yea, there are many different ways to implement a work around for this. Not sure what Google's stance would be on having the user entering the information and you storing that into your database, using Google's geocoding to find a "nearby" address, then having the user move the point to a much closer location. The problem with this would be that I'd consider storing the final lat/lng as still storing the geocoded results to an extent, as the geocoded response was used to obtain the location. Without storing the lat/lng there isn't a lot use storing the user information in the database at all. At least, that is my take on it. It is all a play on words, maybe someone from Google could give you more insight. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Google Maps JavaScript API v3" 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-js-api-v3?hl=en.
