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; } } }

Building a Geocoder in for Tiger 2010 and Tiger 2020 Data

dewright_ca

A number of years ago ESRI built a LOT.XML file that supported all of the US Census Tables and features needed to build a Address Locator. Now we are in ArcGIS Pro using the new style of locators and this process is beyond belief to try and migrate.

Has anyone come up with any solutions for this?

Find more posts tagged with

Analysis

Desktop

Accepted answers

All comments

JoeBorgione

I have to ask, why are you using 10 year old Tiger data?

What 2020 Tiger data are you using? What is giving you a problem with the new style locators?

dewright_ca

The that locator is the lowest level of my composite; I have TomTom and Here as well as City/County data higher in that stack.

The goal is to get a consistent way to take the TIGER 2020 data much like the Geocoding team had templated and provide that guidance.

JoeBorgione

For the sake of discussion: If you are already using higher quality data, what value does the Tiger data add? I looked for Tiger 2020 streets earlier just to see what it has, and couldn't find it.

Now we are in ArcGIS Pro using the new style of locators and this process is beyond belief to try and migrate.

^^^ This is what I don't understand. I create new style locators and composite them together all the time. But then again, I don't use Tiger data...

dewright_ca

I can't say the TomTom and Here are higher-quality; based on the amount of error submissions I have to give that take quite some time to ever get addressed. What I can say is that the refreshed TIGER data means there is a new baseline to work upwards from.

In order to make Tiger really work with the 2010 and then the 2012 refresh data there was a number of files that made up of the EDGES, FACES, PLACE, as well as a FEATNAMES that made it work smoothly.

JoeBorgione

Didn't quite get the part of Tom Tom and Here, but now I get it. I've always been leery of commercially available data; comes from working in 9-1-1 for a number of years. I've always been a 'roll yer own' sort of guy when it comes to geocoding.

dewright_ca

Agreed; but our PSAPS are unwilling to share their data consistently and
while we are working on consuming data from our City and Counties that is
time consuming.

Join the Conversation

Signed in members can post, follow updates, and more. New here? Register a free account.

Quick Links

Community Help
Find useful guides, FAQs, and documents to help you navigate and make the most of Esri Community.