One hotel, however many codes your sellers give it
Revo Map resolves each supplier property code to one hotel, using evidence a person has reviewed. Your own codes and the seller's native codes stay on the booking.
Case ALPINE · HT900
Approved
Supplier record
The Saltline Hotel Dubai
10 Harbour Street, Dubai
ALPINE · HT900
Proposed property
The Saltline Hotel
10 Harbor Street, Dubai
REVO · c100-0001
Evidence
- AddressSame after normalising spelling
- Coordinates38 m apart
- ChainIndependent in both records
- NameSimilar. Never enough alone
Approved by Daniel, mapping analyst
Corvane Travel. Evidence on record. Hotel identity only.
Each match shows its address, coordinates and name evidence, and who approved it.
- 1
- TravelRevo property ID linking the same hotel across sellers
- Every
- new match is reviewed by a person
- 2
- codes kept on every booking: yours and the seller's
Each case arrives with its evidence and its blockers
The reviewer sees the seller's record beside the proposed property, then what supports the match and what stands in its way. Pick a case to compare them.
Needs review
Case HT412: Verbena Suites Porto
Supplier record
Verbena Suites Porto
Rua do Cais 41, Porto, PT
ALPINE · HT412
Feed rev 38 · rooftop-level geocode
Proposed property
Hotel Verbena
Rua do Cais 41, Porto, PT
REVO · c100-0212
Evidence
- Address
- Same street number, same building
- Supports
- Coordinates
- 6 m apart. Hotels can share a building
- Weak
- Telephone
- Same number, which may be a shared front desk
- Weak
- Chain
- Verbena Group against independent
- Conflict
Blockers
- Chain differs while the building matches. This could be two hotels at one address.
Approving over a conflict needs a written justification.
Reviewer can: approve link, reject candidate, create distinct property, or escalate.
Illustrative. Companies and data are fictional.
Say no once
Rejecting a candidate writes a lasting record with a reason and a name. The next import can't propose that pair again, so nobody re-reviews the same wrong match every month.
Rejection record
- Supplier code
- ALPINE · HT118
- Rejected property
- REVO · c100-0488, Marlow Quay Lodge
- Reason
- Next door, different hotel. Confirmed from the property websites.
- Decided by
- Mapping analyst, Corvane Travel
- Recorded
- 12 Sep, mapping snapshot v6
- Effect
- This pair won't be proposed again. Undoing it takes a new decision with its own reason.
Illustrative. Companies and data are fictional.
What it does
Preserves native codes
A supplier code is unique only inside that seller's namespace, so the same code from two sellers stays two records. Canonical identity sits alongside the code and never overwrites it.
Shows contradictions on their own
Address, coordinates, chain and name each say something different about a match. Conflicts sit apart from supporting evidence, where a reviewer can't miss them.
Handles the unmapped openly
A hotel with no approved match stays unmapped and visible. It never gets quietly swapped for a similar property at quote or booking time.
The Saltline Hotel, Dubai
Mapping snapshot v7, approved by a person, with evidence on record
- Your code
- MT-DXB-0042
- Stays in your systems and reports
- Supplier's native code
- ALPINE · HT900
- Used to book. Never overwritten
- TravelRevo property ID
- REVO · c100-0001
- Links the same hotel across sellers
Published versions don't change. New ones replace them
Rolling back publishes the earlier contents as a new version, with a reason attached. The wrong version stays in the history, and connections pinned to it go back for a retest.
| Version | State | What changed and why | Decided by | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| v9 | StatePublished | What changed and whyRollback to the contents of v7. HT412 was linked to the wrong hotel in v8. | Decided byAnalyst, with second reviewer | Date22 Oct |
| v8 | StateSuperseded | What changed and why14 links approved, including HT412. Kept for bookings and audit. | Decided byAnalyst | Date14 Oct |
| v7 | StateSuperseded | What changed and why6 links approved. HT205 corrected, with reason recorded. | Decided byAnalyst | Date2 Oct |
| v6 | StateSuperseded | What changed and whyFirst snapshot approved for this connection. | Decided byAnalyst | Date12 Sep |
Illustrative. Companies and data are fictional.
Hotels only, on purpose
Room names look like the easy next step and carry real risk. Revo Map settles which hotel a code means and leaves the rooms to the seller's own codes and terms.
Kept separate
Deluxe Sea View
Alpine · Non-refundable
Deluxe Room, Sea View
Kestrel · Free cancellation
- Merged
- No
- Codes and terms
- Seller's own
Illustrative. Companies and data are fictional.
What it covers, and what it leaves out
The list on the right is deliberate, and we'll say when any of it changes.
Included
- Hotel identity mapping with supplier-native codes preserved
- Human review of every new mapping
- A review queue with evidence, conflicts and alternatives
- Recorded rejections that stop a pair being proposed again
- Versioned snapshots, with diff and rollback
- Your own property codes kept alongside the seller's
Deliberately left out
- Room mapping or merging of commercially equivalent rooms
- Reconciling what all-inclusive means from one seller to the next
- Automatic approval
- Licensed reference data
How accurate is the mapping?
We don't publish an accuracy figure. A wrong link can send a guest to the wrong hotel, which is why every new mapping starts with human review.
Does the queue show a confidence score?
Any score is calibrated against audited samples, and never self-reported by an AI model. The evidence comes first, because a single number invites people to approve without reading.
Do you map rooms?
No. Two rooms with the same label can differ on occupancy, view, board and cancellation terms. Rooms and rates pass through with the seller's own codes.
Can other companies see our mappings?
No. Crosswalks and source records are scoped to your organisation and the connection they belong to.
What happens to old bookings when a mapping is corrected?
A correction creates a new version. A booking keeps the supplier reference and mapping version it was made under, so its history still reads correctly.
Questions we'd ask too
Straight answers, including where the answer is no.
Send us your worst mapping story
The hard cases are the ones worth comparing: two hotels in one building, retired codes and feeds with no country.