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; } } }

Limit repeat count in Survey123 without the _count field in schema

BamJam

I survey that is using a submission url with an existing feature service and I am trying to limit a repeat count to 1, but avoid the _count field being included in the schema. I've read that this is possible by referencing another field in the repeat_count column. I have attempted this, but it seems to add the {repeat}_count field to the schema regardless of what I enter in the repeat_count column of the repeat question. Does anyone have an example form that limits the repeat count of a repeat question, but does not require the _count field to be added to the schema?

Vind meer berichten getagd met

Accepted answers

All comments

JamesTedrick

Hi Brandon,

I believe that I addressed this at this comment - unfortunately, the workaround no longer works.

roemhildtg

Are there any plans to fix this?

JamesTedrick

Hi Gregg,

While noted, it's not in the immediate roadmap to fix - another workaround is to have a field in the feature service with _count, whether necessary or not for data purposes. It would be helpful if you could file an enhancement request via Esri support, which would allow us to track the impact of this.

BamJam

James,

Our issue with adding this field to the feature service is that our back end DBMS is Oracle, and all field names are created with all uppercase characters. Unfortunately, Survey123 Connect creates the _count field in all lowercase, which is preventing the publishing from completing due to the case mismatch. I have tried to run the alter field gp tool to change the case of the field in the feature class, but it does not change. I've also attempted this workaround to accomplish changing the case of the field, but it did not work either. So, it seems I don't have control to change the case of the field name in our Oracle db, or in Survey123 Connect. Even though the field exists in our feature service, Survey123 Connect will not recognize it. Any suggestions on how to get around this?

GlenGardner1

Did this Enhancement Request ever get created? Is there or should there be an Idea with voting created in ArcGIS Ideas?

I too would like to have this working. My use case is that I only want to create one new record in a repeat from selecting a feature in an Inbox per submission.

dougbrowning

I have had many issues with repeat_count, esp when nested.

So instead I use a count(fieldinrepeat) and set a constraint on it. Only bummer is they have to go one past for it to trigger, then delete that last one. It works fine though.

Works much better, esp for large repeats with lots of fields. Hope that helps.

roemhildtg

Hi Doug - can you proved a more detailed example? I'm not 100% clear on what you mean. It sounds super useful.

DougBrowning2

Couple of ways depending on what you are trying to do but the key is the same.

Inside my repeat I have a field that counts up some other field in my repeat.
I have a field the inherits the key from the Parent so I just count that.. Or just make a dummy field.

Field Calc

RecKey ${LineKey}

Then do a running total inside the repeat. Using once so that it grows as you add, and it does not recalc on me.

Then you can add a constraint right here to make sure they do not go to far. Note it does let them create 51 but they cannot save it. In one form I even set text to tell them right away they went too far.

Field Calc Constraint

PointNum once(count(${RecKey})) .<=50

If you want to make sure they went far enough then you need to move it outside the repeat. In my case I want them to do exactly 50.

Field Calc Constraint

PointsCompleted count(${RecKey}) .=50

I actually just do the last option since it will catch both. But technically they could then make like 100 and have to delete. But in our case that is not really an issue, they usually just miss one.

I hope that makes more sense, harder to type then I thought. But in the end you are just counting and then using a constraint.

roemhildtg

Ah interesting. Could you, in theory, use this to force users to submit at least one repeat record?

BamJam

Doug,

That is a creative workaround. I think in my case I'd prefer to avoid the potential for confusion with the users having to delete repeats. The whole repeat portion of the form seems to be the most difficult for our users to grasp. Adding nested repeats is even more confusing to them. I ended up using a hosted feature service that has the schema Survey123 is expecting with the _count fields where necessary. Then, I use FME to sync the data from the hosted data store to my Oracle database nightly, ignoring the _count field in the hosted service.

CarlosKrefft

Brandon Jameson‌: Don't be difficult.

BamJam

Carlos Krefft: Typical user...

NorahGallucci

Hello @JamesTedrick

I have the same difficulty in a workflow in Survey123 Connect, with a HANA db feature service.

Do you have an alternative solution (Workaround) to be able to overcome this difficulty?

Doe mee aan het gesprek

Aangemelde leden kunnen berichten plaatsen, updates volgen en meer. Nieuw hier? Registreer een gratis account.

Snelle Links

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