Latest Contributions by ThomasKonzel

Thank you for the reply. We just moved from Pro 2.6 over to 3.0.3 and the Tab key worked. It appears that the Enter a Traverse tool has been changed to work only with the Enter key somewhere between 2.6 and 3.0.3. Thank you. ... View more

Has this manual cache process been implemented?  We get emails asking for updated data when the data on our Open Data Portal Hub site is up to date.  It's just that the reported data isn't accurate.  It's very frustrating for years now, to have to explain to users that the data is up to date.  If you're not able to create a process to manually cache the data, then AT LEAST give us a check box to remove any reported data due to inaccuracies. ... View more

Thank you, this is helpful information. ... View more

Thank you @IsmaelChivite.  It appears that this local Survey123 website can only be installed for Enterprise behind a firewall using a reverse proxy to serve it to the Internet.  Is this correct? ... View more

Good afternoon @Anonymous User  I didn't feel like my previous list was sufficient so I updated it here.  This may be a better set of steps to follow.  I'd appreciate if @jcarlson could also review and provide additional feedback.  My steps may not be complete. Use ArcGIS Pro to export your Pro Parcel Fabric Tax_Parcel feature class to an XML Workspace Document (Schema Only) This will create an empty XML document containing only the schema Use ArcCatalog to import this XML Workspace Document schema into your test geodatabase as a new feature class OUTSIDE a feature dataset Name this new feature class the same as the original but with _test appended to the end, like Tax_Parcel_test Ensure there is no versioning or topology associated with this new, test feature class This should yield a ArcMap ready feature class to receive the Pro Parcel Fabric features Point your script it at this new, test feature class instead of your actual Parcel Fabric Tax_Parcel feature class within the feature dataset. Keep in mind that you may need to map fields if you’re not using an identical copy of the schema. If I’m not mistaken, my team is using the Pro python because Desktop doesn't have access to the Pro Parcel Fabric. ... View more

Keary, I believe you should first prepare your legacy target feature class by copying parcel_poly to a new name like parcel_poly_test, which is OUTSIDE of a feature dataset; Then ensure versioning is disabled and no topology is associated with this new, temp feature class; Point your backfill script to this new, temp feature class; Keep in mind that, unless your PF and temp feature class schemas are identical, you may have to map fields from the PF feature class to your new, temp feature class. ... View more

Yes, we have a scheduled task that runs a python script nightly to backfill a stand-alone feature class having the same name as the original, versioned feature class.  This way, all the legacy apps that used the versioned feature class in the past can still connect to the new, stand-alone feature class outside the feature dataset.  It appears to be a simple process.  After reviewing the script, we don't use the last_edited_date for updates as @jcarlson does - we push the entire dataset nightly. ... View more

Good afternoon @Anonymous User, We're doing something similar by backfilling our traditional parcel layers and annotation layers with the new Parcel Fabric data for legacy ArcMap and other systems.  This is just about a mandatory step if you want to continue to access the data from ArcMap via an enterprise geodatabase.  However, we first unversioned our data to remove these complexities and, because the legacy data is now read-only, we no longer needed it to be versioned.  Topology and versioning is now handled in the Parcel Fabric dataset. I hope this helps. @ThomasKonzel  ... View more

This was a great webinar and we'll provide this video to staff to get them acclimated when migrating from Desktop to Pro. ... View more

Maybe I'm misunderstanding too, but it sounds like what I call "the free companion" AGO Creator license to your Desktop license is mutually-exclusive to either AGO or Enterprise - it also sounds like a common thought is that it should be available in both systems so users don't have to decide where to assign their license(s).  I think what the community thinks is that the user shouldn't have to choose between AGO and Enterprise, especially after years of AGO-only use for their account.  These companion accounts have built a lot of AGO content over the years and to move them from AGO to Enterprise Creator sounds to them like loss of access, or what Nathan Fazer‌ is describing as an additional cost. It's also going to happen for the Utility Network, too?  I suppose it will and we will have several more users in this camp. Right now, this new User Type isn't sounding very conducive to migration to Pro and Enterprise.  I don't see a solution either, due to the crazy licensing that's developed over the years.  On a similar note, Autodesk recently announced that they would no longer provide concurrent (shared network) licensing and they're "offering" a 2:1 increase of licenses to offset the burden.  This is in no way, shape, or form a benefit nor does it offset what they're about to break - we have 40+ users on 10 network licenses, so now we have to decide which 50% of our users will get the named-user subscription.  This is a delicate game for already cash-strapped jurisdictions. Late edit: hot off the presses...How do I license my ArcGIS Parcel Fabric?  ... View more

I concur with Jamie Petersen‌ comment below. Here is the solution: customers with concurrent-use licensing, who also have Enterprise Advanced, should provisioned 1 Parcel Fabric User Extension to their Portal for each concurrent use license seat. ... View more