If the date associated with a location can be used, FamilySearch has a location lookup which can offer historically accurate names; one big advantage (besides historical names) is that they have a whole process for validating and updating their locations database.
There is an API (which I looked at briefly a few years ago, but haven't the current skill-set to try it out). I don't recall if permissions to use the API would need to be set up by each user (a.k.a. Google's location permission) or if it can be set up by an application (such as SmartCopy), no matter who uses it.
An interactive interface to that database is here: https://www.familysearch.org/en/research/places/
The biggest change to SmartCopy may involve changing where in the overall parsing process that locations are processed; right now the location parsing context "knows nothing" about the associated date.
When the returned "parsed" location is ambiguous (e.g. no date?), it may require a little popup to allow the user to make a choice.
If the date associated with a location can be used, FamilySearch has a location lookup which can offer historically accurate names; one big advantage (besides historical names) is that they have a whole process for validating and updating their locations database.
There is an API (which I looked at briefly a few years ago, but haven't the current skill-set to try it out). I don't recall if permissions to use the API would need to be set up by each user (a.k.a. Google's location permission) or if it can be set up by an application (such as SmartCopy), no matter who uses it.
An interactive interface to that database is here: https://www.familysearch.org/en/research/places/
The biggest change to SmartCopy may involve changing where in the overall parsing process that locations are processed; right now the location parsing context "knows nothing" about the associated date.
When the returned "parsed" location is ambiguous (e.g. no date?), it may require a little popup to allow the user to make a choice.