The reason I’ve asked about what changes you have submitted is this;
I believe the zip code feature offered under “Location” in the menu has a large footprint. As stated, I live in central Connecticut but the zip code feature loads the states of not only Connecticut but New York and Massachusetts. And the adjustable “Range” setting isn’t much help. I’ve tried zero miles, and 10 miles. My assumption was I would narrow down the amount of area the scanner (or database) would look at but that’s not the case. I believe when I posted my findings I was told to review how “Range” works for a better understanding of why I couldn’t narrow down the radius from my zip code location. Sorry, but that explanation eludes me, and since I’ve come to accept it, I’m not going to research it again. To me, it’s a case of “It’s just the way it is”. So, submitting corrections relating to why so much database is included with the Range reduced to nothing or almost nothing seems to be fruitless. I believe the database is performing as designed, given certain limitations, which would discount any submitted corrections of this kind.
So, if it’s not a correction, it’s a suggestion… to reduce the area included in a zip code search to the smaller area a zip code relates to. That’s possibly due to the too numerous zip codes in use, where any attempt to limit each zip code would require an unreasonable amount of memory in the master database?
If and when you get a response on your submittals, please post it here. I’d be interested in how the response is generated. It could just be a “canned” response such as “You submittal has been received and rejected” or “Is under review”, or something like that… or better yet, they take the time to explain what’s involved.
