nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

default coordnate field

HellenSimpson

It would be great to have the option to include default fields for coordinates with a point feature dataset - ideally this would automatically update when a feature is created and there would be no need for either manually updating either by using 'calculate geometry' or tool under data management.

Najít více příspěvků označených jako

Geodatabase

Status: Otevřít

Komentáře

TimBarnes

Are you talking about within shapefiles or within GeoDatabases?

Shapefiles can't (AFAIK) have their attribute table automatically updated with their geometry but featureclasses within GeoDatabases do this by default.

There is the potential problem with shapefiles that since geometry as recorded in the attribute table isn't dynamic, the user needs to be sufficiently competent to update the values before relying on them/exporting them out of the att. table as recent changes to geometry won't be included. By making things appear dynamic (i.e. automatic adding of geometry fields), it may lead more basic users to rely on attribute table values that are plain wrong.

JakeKrall

@timmo1982 Good comment, but these would potentially be fields (in a geodatabase) similar to a Shape_Length and/or Shape_Area field that cannot in any way be edited (with a semi-grayed out effect) and could be copied and pasted, the values would change accordingly when the point is moved.

As for Shapefiles, they should not be used for storing permanent data any longer, should only be used for export/import to and from other systems. They should also be changed to a compiled single file format similar to an Autocad DWG, but with attributes still intact.

Připojte se k diskusi

Přihlaste se pro psaní příspěvků, sledování obsahu a další. Jste tu noví? Zaregistrujte se zdarma.