[Proposal] Structural Innovation for Google Maps: From a Geographer with 47 Years of Experience

Google Maps tips & tricks
, ,
1

Introduction and Rationale

The Proposer: I am a lifelong scholar who has dedicated 47 years to the field of Geography. As an active Google Maps Local Guide, I have contributed over 1,000 high-precision field photographs to improve the accuracy of geographical data.

Rationale: With Google Maps now moving toward integrating high-precision map data in South Korea, it is the opportune time to overhaul the service’s fundamental architecture. This proposal aims to implement a next-generation map service that aligns with geographic principles and ensures world-class data integrity and user experience.

Phase 1: Core Foundation & Data Reliability

01. Correcting UI Location Offsets and Prioritizing Official Data

Problem: Significant location offset bugs occur when adding new places, where the pin does not align with the intended coordinates.

Proposal: Fix coordinate synchronization errors in the UI and grant Override Priority to official data from government agencies over unofficial user edits.

02. Data Cleansing System and User Trust Scoring

Problem: Information pollution caused by out-of-context photos (e.g., unrelated airport photos uploaded to Ilsan lake park).

Proposal: Strengthen AI-based image filtering and implement a Trust Score system for contributors to ensure that high-quality data from reliable sources is prioritized and reflected instantly.

Phase 2: Data Architecture & Spatial Logic

03. Establishing Systematic Name Hierarchy

Proposal: Categorize place names into Administrative, Natural, and Cultural Names. Implement a hierarchical display logic based on Zoom Levels, from continental to neighborhood scales.

04. Implementing Drill-down Visibility based on Containment

Proposal: Establish Parent-Child Relationships for large-scale sites (e.g., Palace > Individual Building) to ensure detailed information appears progressively as the user zooms in.

05. Area-based (Polygon) POI and Cluster Management

Proposal: Introduce Polygon POIs for areas with multiple internal assets (e.g., Sculpture Parks) to allow collective management of clustered objects under a single spatial theme.

Phase 3: Visual UX & Information Design

06. Hierarchical Symbolization and Labeling

Proposal: Differentiate symbol sizes and utilize Color Gradients and specialized pictograms(e.g., pagodas, monuments) to allow users to intuitively perceive the significance of a location.

07. Visual Separation of Public and Private POIs

Proposal: Use distinct Color Coding for public landmarks vs. commercial establishments, enabling users to distinguish the nature of the location within a fraction of a second.

08. Dual-track Review Systems based on Category

Proposal: Separate commercial “Rating Reviews” from “Knowledge Contribution Reviews” for historical and public sites, encouraging users to share factual information rather than subjective star ratings.

Phase 4: Temporal & Dynamic Maintenance

09. Multi-Review System for Time-series Archiving

Proposal: Allow high-level Local Guides to post multiple reviews for a single POI to document seasonal and yearly changes (Time-series Archiving).

10. Time-series POI Management for Temporary Events

Proposal: Create Annual Independent POIs for recurring festivals (e.g., “2024 Flower Expo,” “2025 Flower Expo”). This preserves the historical evolution of the event as a digital archive without cluttering the permanent site data.

11. User-defined Data Expiration Dates

Proposal: Require creators of temporary POIs (e.g., festival food stalls) to set an Expiration Date, ensuring that “Ghost POIs” are automatically removed from the map once the event ends.

5. Statement of Cooperation

As a scholar who has spent nearly five decades studying the Earth’s surface and human interaction with it, I believe these improvements will set a new global standard for digital cartography. I am fully prepared to engage in detailed discussions, provide further case studies, or consult on the technical implementation of these items. Please feel free to contact me for any clarifications.

5 Likes
Solving the "Ghost POI" Problem: A Proposal for Autonomous Expiration Dates
2

Welcome to Connect, @geoKoreaSong , and thank you for raising some very important topic.
I fully agree in most of the points mentioned by you, and I could add one more point: use the GPS position of the drivers to approve/deny the addition of new roads in Google Maps.

This is, according to my experience, related to the fact that, when we add an address to a POI, Maps is placing the PIN according to the address. It can be usually easily fixed by correcting the PIN position during the submission.

Official data always have the priority, if submitted through the https://contentpartners.maps.google.com/, otherwise Google will prioritize users data for businesses and their own geospatial data for Maps. Unfortunately most of the Local Authorities are not submitting their own data, even if this would help to quickly update/improve the information in Google Maps

Fully agree about using the AI for filtering image, even if the risk is that new images (improvement in a place) or images for new businesses will never be accepted. AI is a model working on crowd-sourced data, so if Google applies your suggestion how can we add a just opened business, without any image already available online? A Trusted Score can be an interesting idea, if Google find a way to identify the “trusted contributors” among a group of 500 millions of Local Guides. In 10 years as a moderator I’ve reported thousands of contributors that uploaded “real images” of the places (but unfortunately all stolen from the web). Would you trust them?

As far as I know Google is already working on this, and we can already see that on Google Maps. Isn’t it, @MortenCopenhagen ?

The “Located within” feature do exists already, even if widely unused by businesses and users

The ability to use/add polygons war removed several years ago, because widely abused. It can be solved with the cooperation of the local authorities, through the method explained above, and this applies especially for parks, as they can be identified both as a geographical area (with defined boundaries) and Point Of Interest

Haven’t you noticed that part already in Google Maps? Google is already using different pictograms and color codes to differentiate categories and businesses. For more details: Google Maps gets a new look

image
image1200×679 51.3 KB

As an example I will use the area of the park mentioned by you, where I have highlighted 3 pins:

What do you mean? Can you share an example?

Google is often inviting us to update our reviews instead, to avoid a sea of reviews that can become outdated

This is an interesting option, much better than closing and reopening the same POI every year

I like that, if linked with the previous one

I am taking this opportunity to ,wish you a great 2026

Solving the "Ghost POI" Problem: A Proposal for Autonomous Expiration Dates
3

If you by Administrative also mean political (like Nations, States, Counties, Municipalities, and city districts they are all already implemented and all can overlap.

I’m not sure what is meant by Cultural in this context. Maybe a national forrest/park or some land owned by indigenous people. They already exist.

And natural features certainly are found on the base layer where we the volunteers can not add or edit pins and areas.

1 Like
4

Google Maps is a huge “ship” where very few suggestions are not already implemented in some form or deliberately avoided. New features very rarely get implemented, so I would suggest you present ideas in separate posts rather than dumping so many feature requests in one post. This would allow you to better present your suggestions with illustrations and examples. And others can provide input and specific comments and suggest further improvements. This is not realistic when you share more than one suggestion per post.

5

As a Korean speaker who is not fully fluent in English, I would like to ask for your kind understanding if my responses are somewhat delayed. Nevertheless, I am committed to sharing my thoughts as clearly as possible, one step at a time.

I deeply value mutual respect and courtesy, so I strive to write as politely as I can. However, since I am not entirely familiar with Western or English-speaking cultural norms, I may inadvertently make a mistake. I hope you can understand this as well.

The reason I presented these 11 suggestions together in one post was to provide Google with a clear, birds-eye view of the entire vision. I organized it this way for better readability and because these 11 items are closely interconnected; they are meant to be considered as a cohesive set to truly improve the map experience.

As I have already begun to do, I plan to explain the background of each suggestion to my fellow Local Guides in detail. I believe that a brief summary alone might not fully convey ‘why’ these changes are necessary or ‘how’ Google should develop and apply the right solutions.

6

While the features you mentioned may exist in theory, they do not function properly or are highly inaccurate in certain regions like South Korea due to data export regulations and complex addressing systems. My proposal is to improve these aspects so that users can clearly perceive administrative and cultural divisions, taking these regional specificities into account. Here are the specific reasons and examples:

1. Limitations of ‘Administrative’ Elements in Korea

  • What works: Names of administrative units like Provinces (States), Municipalities, and Neighborhoods (Dong) are displayed. Searching for a specific ‘Dong’ shows the boundary with a red dotted line.

  • What is missing: Unlike in English-speaking countries, the visual layers that distinguish different administrative levels (e.g., overlapping ‘Gu’ and ‘Dong’ districts) through color-coding or clear demarcation are often vague or absent in Korea.

2. The Problem of Overlapping Boundaries In South Korea, the addressing system is complicated by the coexistence of ‘Legal Status Districts’ (Beopjeong-dong) and ‘Administrative Districts’ (Haengjeong-dong). It is important to note that while the boundaries of Beopjeong-dong remain fixed over time, those of Haengjeong-dong are subject to frequent changes depending on administrative needs. While Google Maps primarily tries to show data based on administrative districts, the boundaries are often inaccurate or ambiguous because high-precision mapping data (1:5,000 scale) is not fully integrated into Google’s servers.

3. Limitations of the Base Layer (Regional Disparity) The claim that these features are ‘already implemented’ holds true for countries where Google can directly build high-precision maps, such as the US or Europe. However, in Korea, Google relies on limited data provided by the government due to security-related export restrictions. This leads to:

  • Boundary Errors: Administrative boundaries often appear different from reality or look disconnected.

  • Delayed Updates: There is a significant lag in reflecting changes when administrative districts are reorganized.

For these reasons, a ‘one-size-fits-all’ approach does not work for the Korean map, which is why I am proposing a more robust solution that addresses these localized challenges.

1 Like
7

This is probably not a Google Maps issue but more likely an issue related to the local authorities not participating in the free program to share their precise map data with Google Maps and hence with their citizens.

They may not want to share the data with Google Maps for some reason. But if your goal is to have more accurate data on Google Maps, your time is probably better spend trying to get your local authorities to share the better data.

A few LGs have successfully helped local authorities getting enrolled and started sharing the more accurate geo data with Google Maps.

Once the geo database is linked to Google Maps there should be no delays. It is often done automatically at certain intervals.

1 Like
8

First of all, I have just started following you, @ErmesT. I am truly impressed by your dedication as an Ecologist and your passion for nature. I also deeply appreciate the time and effort you took to analyze my suggestions in such professional detail.

Based on your analysis and feedback, I will provide detailed explanations for each item, one by one, in the replies below. I look forward to our continued discussion.

1 Like
9

Like @MortenCopenhagen said it’s up to the local administrations to update the info.
Some country simply doesn’t want to have accurate data on Google Maps (that’s an app managed by a private company).
Furthermore, all the features enabled (color coding, graphics) are obviously global. Customizing them by country would be pointless and would only create confusion for people traveling from one country to another.

10

Thank you for your feedback, @MortenCopenhagen. However, I would like to clarify that the situation in South Korea has recently evolved beyond a simple ‘lack of data.’

The South Korean government and Google have already reached an agreement to integrate high-precision map data into Google Maps. Although certain sensitive areas will be masked or blurred due to national security and the unique geopolitical situation of the peninsula, the essential geo-data is now being provided to Google.

This is precisely why I am presenting these suggestions now. Since Google Maps is about to undergo a major update for the Korean region, I believe this is the perfect time to address long-standing systemic issues. ‘Lack of data’ can no longer be an excuse for the current inaccuracies.

My core question and the heart of my proposal is this: Even with this high-precision data, does Google have the technical solutions to properly integrate it without delays and to accurately visualize Korea’s unique and complex addressing system (such as the distinction between Administrative and Legal-status districts)? Items 1 and 3 among the 11 suggestions I submitted specifically call for those systemic solutions. I look forward to your professional insights on these points.

11

Thank you. I’m happy to help

12

First of all, thank you for your analysis regarding Item 1. The core of my proposal in Item 1 is to fix coordinate synchronization errors in the UI and to grant ‘Override Priority’ to official government data—including site maps, official notices, photos, and descriptions—over unofficial user edits to enhance the map’s reliability.

In response, you pointed out that Google’s systems are already prepared and suggested that the issue lies with the lack of participation from Korean local authorities, encouraging me to persuade the government instead. Surprisingly, I completely agree with your perspective, and I have already taken action on this.

Recently, I submitted a formal report and proposal to major government agencies, including the Korea Heritage Service (KCHO), urging them to prioritize sharing their high-precision data and to cooperate actively with Google Maps. In other words, I fully recognize the vital role of the government in resolving this issue, and I am already working within Korea to bring about tangible change. What I hope for now is that these governmental efforts will be seamlessly integrated into Google’s system without delays. I will discuss more specific details regarding this in my subsequent replies.

1 Like
13

Thank you for joining the discussion, @MortenCopenhagen. While the features you mentioned may be standard globally, their current implementation in South Korea causes significant confusion due to our region’s unique characteristics.

1. Issues with Administrative Districts: South Korea utilizes a unique dual system of Administrative Dong and Legal-status Dong. Notably, Administrative Dong names change frequently based on administrative needs, and Google Maps tends to prioritize them. The problem is that these two systems often overlap without intelligent filtering across zoom levels. This makes it extremely difficult for users to identify their precise location or the correct district name.

2. Redefining ‘Cultural’ Names: The concept is entirely different from the indigenous lands you mentioned. In Korea, ‘Cultural’ names refer to Nationally Designated Heritage Sites like Gyeongbokgung Palace or Bulguksa Temple. These are the most iconic landmarks of a region. Currently, Google Maps treats these significant sites with the same—or even lower—visual priority than local commercial establishments, severely hindering readability. Moreover, these sites cover vast areas and contain numerous buildings, requiring individual POI management within a larger structure.

3. Absence of Hierarchical Logic: Information should be organized progressively (Continent > Nation > City > Neighborhood) as a user zooms in. However, in Korea, we frequently see small restaurants appearing before major historical sites. For instance, Changdeokgung Palace consists of 15 distinct sectors, each housing multiple buildings. This necessitates a hierarchical POI setup. (I can provide more detailed ideas on this in a future discussion.) This is exactly why I proposed a more refined hierarchical display logic.

I believe a more localized approach is necessary to make Google Maps truly functional in South Korea.

14

Thanks @geoKoreaSong
The first time that I discovered the possibility for the public administration to partner with Google was a sunny day of October 2017. I was walking on San Francisco (California), Using Google Maps to get to the 2017 Local Guides Summit venue, I had to cross Columbus Avenue to get there. In Maps, the street was marked in red, with a message that said something like, “Columbus Avenue is closed to traffic from 7:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. for the Columbus Day Parade.” When I reached Google headquarters, I was fortunate enough to speak with an engineer, who explained that the message had been created by the city of San Francisco.
A year later, in collaboration with a small Italian municipality, I uploaded all the trails in a national park to Maps. They provided me with the map data and a letter authorizing me to do so on their behalf. In two days, all the trails, and their associated POIs, were uploaded.

1 Like
15

It seems there is a misunderstanding regarding my proposal. I am not requesting a special exception exclusively for South Korea. Rather, I am proposing a fundamental improvement to the current Global Standard of Google Maps to make it more logical and intuitive for everyone.

My vision for this New Global Standard is based on the following principles:

  1. Minimal Colors with High Contrast: To ensure immediate recognition, I recommend using no more than five colors. These colors must be selected based on saturation and contrast to ensure they are clearly distinguishable, even for users with vision impairments or in various lighting conditions.

  2. Major Categories (Primary Color Coding): Assign a few core colors based on the nature of the site (e.g., Blue for Public, Yellow for Semi-Public, Red for Private, and White for Others).

  3. Detailed Categories (Pictograms): Utilize modern, specialized pictograms on top of these high-contrast color layers to specify the exact type of place.

With this system, any traveler in the world can discern the nature of a location within a second. My core idea is to maintain the richness of pictograms while solving the issue of visual clutter through a limited color palette and high-contrast hierarchy. This would truly enhance the user-centric experience on a global scale.

16

Thank you for sharing your wonderful experience, @ErmesT! It is truly inspiring to hear how your proactive collaboration with the city of San Francisco and the Italian municipality led to such tangible improvements on Google Maps.

Your success stories confirm that my current efforts—communicating with the Korea Heritage Service (KCHO)—are moving in the right direction. I am working hard to ensure that Korea’s rich data can be integrated as efficiently as your examples from 2017 and 2018.

However, I would like to emphasize that my proposal for a ‘New Global Standard’ regarding color coding and pictograms goes a step beyond data integration. While your examples focused on getting the data onto the map, my suggestion focuses on how users intuitively consume that data.

Even with perfect data, if a user cannot distinguish between a public safety office and a private commercial shop within a second due to visual clutter, the map’s utility is diminished. I believe that by adopting a limited, high-contrast color hierarchy (Public vs. Private) as I proposed, Google Maps can evolve into a much more sophisticated and user-centric platform globally.

I would love to hear your professional thoughts on whether such a simplified color hierarchy could indeed reduce cognitive load for users worldwide, regardless of the specific country’s data quality.

17

I dont know how to say this politely, but the notion that my culture is so special it does not fit into Google Maps is probably not correct. You mentioned the example that a commercial shop shows up before a cultural heritage site can be explained as follows: the selection of what places to show to each Maps users is determined individually based on search history and interests of the user. Also, the popularity of places play a role.

So you wanting to decide what other users sees first is unlikely to fly. Google has made specially designed larger, black and white icons for culturally important sites to partly meet your wish. Are you aware of these icons. Maybe they have not yet been implemented in your country.

Please keep in mind that you are unlikely to reach Googlers with decision power here on Connect. No such Googlers will join this discussion in my experience.

If you instead engaged in helping your authorities provide more and better data to Google Maps in the Geo Partnership, then you would know that a Googler is assigned as the contact person. They might be a more realistic path for you to influence the system. Or at least the contact person will know exactly what is possible and how your reality can be more accurately reflected on Google Maps.

@ErmesT and I are just volunteers trying to point you in the right direction. So please know that we are not representing Google. And your chances to engage in a dialogue directly with the relevant Googlers are very slim. That is why I’m advocating for you to team up with your national map authorities if you really hope to make a difference.

1 Like
18

Thank you for the clear explanation regarding personalization and the Geo Partnership. I truly appreciate the time you and @ErmesT take to guide us.

However, my point isn’t that my culture is ‘too special’ for the system, but rather that the current algorithm inadvertently prioritizes commercial popularity over cultural significance. When a temporary commercial shop overshadows a permanent historical site, it creates a ‘data bias’ that doesn’t reflect the real world’s physical and historical hierarchy. Regarding the icons, the issue is less about the ‘shape’ and more about the ‘zoom-level visibility’ and how they are prioritized in the interface.

I have much more to share on this topic, but as it is quite late here and today is the New Year’s Day holiday, I am feeling a bit exhausted and need to rest. I would like to postpone further discussion until late tomorrow afternoon. I hope you understand.

I take your advice about the Geo Partnership seriously and look forward to continuing this conversation when I am refreshed. Happy New Year!

19

Please take your time. This is an interesting discussion for us too.

Please understand that Google is a business, so their decisions on what to show first is also based on what businesses chose to pay a fee to be more prominently shown is not something you are likely to be able to influence. Are you aware of the square icons and icons showing business logos directly on Google Maps? That is paid advertising.

Happy New Year :confetti_ball::tada:

20

I do not deny at all that Google is a profit-seeking corporation. Google is already a transnational giant with immense global influence and a definitive leader in this field. The reason I am calling for such bold innovation from a great company like Google is that I hope to see it exert an even greater ‘positive influence’ for humanity.

History shows that when a market leader loses its competitors, it easily falls into the trap of complacency and arrogance—leading to the downfall of many great firms. Google Maps, currently at the pinnacle of the world, is not immune to this risk. What is the fundamental reason Google can generate such vast profits today? It is because it has consistently satisfied countless users. Therefore, even more than meeting the needs of businesses, listening to users’ concerns and continuously innovating the platform is the only way to ensure sustainable growth.

My proposals are not from the perspective of a single user, but are intended to enhance the convenience of users worldwide. If even one of my 11 proposals is implemented to improve Google Maps, I would be able to depart this world with a joyful heart, knowing that I have fulfilled one of my most significant missions as a geographer.