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
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: articles/azure-maps/how-to-use-best-practices-for-search.md
+2-2Lines changed: 2 additions & 2 deletions
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -1076,7 +1076,7 @@ This reduces the likelihood of low-confidence matches in unrelated regions when
1076
1076
1077
1077
##### Reworded clarity: how "up-hierarchy" results happen
1078
1078
1079
-
When the service can't find a match at the specificity implied by the query, it may "move up the geographic hierarchy" and return a broader location (for example, city, administrative division, or country/region). In those cases, `matchCodes` includes `UpHierarchy`, and properties.type indicates what level was returned.
1079
+
When the service can't find a match at the specificity implied by the query, it may "move up the geographic hierarchy" and return a broader location (for example, city, administrative division, or country/region). In those cases, `matchCodes` includes `UpHierarchy`, and [properties.type] indicates what level was returned.
1080
1080
1081
1081
##### Practical filtering guidance (apply in this order)
1082
1082
@@ -1094,7 +1094,7 @@ When the service can't find a match at the specificity implied by the query, it
1094
1094
1095
1095
### Use geocoding as a data enrichment step
1096
1096
1097
-
When geocoding largeaddress datasets, expect that some records won't return results. This is normal and doesn't indicate a service error.
1097
+
Many organizations collect customer records through free‑form data entry, often without address validation. As a result, these datasets frequently contain non‑deliverable or low‑quality addresses. When geocoding large, unvalidated address sets, it is expected that some records will return weak matches or no results at all. This behavior is normal and does not indicate a service failure.
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: articles/azure-maps/migrate-search-v1-api.md
+51-2Lines changed: 51 additions & 2 deletions
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@ ms.subservice: search
12
12
13
13
# Migrate Azure Maps Search 1.0 APIs
14
14
15
-
[Search][Search v1] API version 1.0 is superseded by the [Search][Search v2026-01-01] 2026‑01‑01 API. The newer version introduces task‑specific endpoints, clearer intent, and improved scalability. This article explains how to migrate existing Search v1 integrations.
15
+
[Search][Search v2026-01-01] API version 2026‑01‑01 supersedes [Search][Search v1]API version 1.0. The newer version introduces task‑specific endpoints, clearer intent, and improved scalability. This article explains how to migrate existing Search v1 integrations.
16
16
17
17
> [!IMPORTANT]
18
18
> Azure Maps [Search API version 1.0][Search v1] has been superseded by [Search API version 2026‑01‑01][Search v2026-01-01]. While Search v1 continues to function, new development should use the latest Search API to access task‑specific endpoints, improved performance, and long‑term support. To avoid future service disruptions, migrate existing Search v1 integrations to Search 2026‑01‑01.
@@ -22,13 +22,58 @@ ms.subservice: search
22
22
| Purpose | Search v1 API | Search 2026‑01‑01 API |
The Search 2026‑01‑01 APIs introduce intent‑specific endpoints, clearer request semantics, and stricter result behavior compared to Search v1. The following table summarizes the most important differences to be aware of when migrating.
35
+
36
+
| Area | Search v1 | Search 2026‑01‑01 |
37
+
|---|---|---|
38
+
| API design | Multi‑purpose endpoints (for example, Search Fuzzy used for both autocomplete and final search) | Intent‑specific APIs (for example, Get Geocoding, Get Geocode Autocomplete, Get Reverse Geocoding) |
39
+
| Autocomplete behavior | Implemented using Search Fuzzy with `typeahead=true`| Dedicated Get Geocode Autocomplete API |
40
+
| Final geocoding | Often relied on fuzzy matching to return a "best guess" | Get Geocoding prioritizes correctness and may return no results |
41
+
| Empty results | Often returned a low‑confidence match | May return HTTP 200 with an empty results array when no match is found |
42
+
| Result confidence handling | Confidence and match quality were often implicit | Confidence, match codes, and entity type are explicit and should be evaluated |
43
+
| Entity hierarchy handling | Fuzzy results could return loosely related entities | Results may roll up to a higher‑level entity (for example, county or region) and should be filtered by entity type |
44
+
| Batch usage | Batch APIs available but often optional | Batch APIs are recommended for large‑scale and enrichment workflows |
45
+
| Data enrichment workflows | Commonly retried with fuzzy search | Explicitly supports enrichment patterns with clearer no‑match signaling |
46
+
| URL structure | Versioned under `/search/*` endpoints | Simplified, task‑specific endpoints (for example, `/geocode`, `/reverseGeocode`) |
47
+
| Future extensibility | Limited ability to evolve individual behaviors | APIs evolve independently based on intent (autocomplete, geocoding, reverse) |
48
+
49
+
### Transactions usage differences
50
+
51
+
Search 2026‑01‑01 uses intent‑specific APIs, which can change how transactions are consumed compared to Search v1.
52
+
53
+
In Search v1, a single multi‑purpose endpoint was often used for both autocomplete and final geocoding. In Search 2026‑01‑01, these scenarios are separated into distinct APIs, which helps align transaction usage more closely with user intent.
54
+
55
+
Key considerations when migrating:
56
+
57
+
- Use [Get Geocode Autocomplete] only for type‑ahead user interactions.
58
+
- Use [Get Geocoding] only when a final address or place is required.
59
+
- Avoid calling final geocoding APIs repeatedly during interactive typing scenarios.
60
+
- Prefer **batch APIs** for large‑scale or background geocoding workflows.
61
+
62
+
For details on how Azure Maps transactions are calculated and billed, see [Understanding Azure Maps transactions].
63
+
64
+
### Result handling changes
65
+
66
+
Search 2026‑01‑01 places greater emphasis on result correctness and explicit match signaling than Search v1.
67
+
68
+
When migrating, review how your application interprets search responses:
69
+
70
+
- A successful request may return **no results** when no suitable match is found. For more information, see [Understand empty geocoding results].
71
+
- Low‑confidence or loosely related matches are less likely to be returned automatically.
72
+
- Applications should evaluate **confidence values**, **match codes**, and **entity types** when determining whether a result is acceptable. For more information, see [Improve result quality for query-based geocoding].
73
+
- If a requested entity isn't found, the service may return a higher‑level entity in the address hierarchy (for example, a region instead of a city). For more information on evaluating result quality and validating that returned entity types match the intended search scenario, see [Best practices for forward geocoding] in _Best practices for Azure Maps Search service_.
74
+
75
+
Don't assume that every successful request returns a usable result. Explicit result evaluation is required to maintain data quality.
76
+
32
77
## Request and response example comparison
33
78
34
79
The following examples show how common Azure Maps Search v1 requests map to their equivalents in Search API 2026‑01‑01. Each example focuses on the same user intent, highlighting the shift from multi‑purpose v1 endpoints to intent‑specific APIs.
@@ -209,3 +254,7 @@ GET https://atlas.microsoft.com/polygon
0 commit comments