I cannot see a previous thread on this issue (but I may be wrong).
It seems to me that it is great when you can accurately identify a specific place for an activity, event, specific building or even down to a specific location for, say, a gravestone; and then record that in Rootsmagic.
However, there are lots of activities where only a general location is known and recording a precise latitude and longitude through geocoding gives the impression of an accuracy that is not actually known.
An example might be recoding an old family photograph; I can record an event and give a date range (between x and y) to show that "uncertainty" of the date; but if I know the location was near the town of Newhaven, Sussex and actually enter Newhaven, Sussex the geocoding will ascribe a very accurate location to the centre of the town that is not true. If I decide just to put the country of Sussex as the location then the geocode just points to the centre of the county.
So I think that geocoding could be enhanced by allowing an additional field to enable to users to record the "uncertainty" of the precise location in the same way that putting "about 1923" or "between 1921 and 1925" allows us to record the uncertainty of dates. Perhaps we need a "within x miles/kilometres/yards/metres" field as an adjunct to the geocode?
Potentially this could be used in future mapping enhancements to show an "area" rather than a "pin" location for such an entry? This would make it easy to see the difference between a "pin" that showed a precise geocode was known (ie a specific building, point of interest, gravestone, church etc) and an "area" which reflected a degree of certainty but not the precise location.