Latest Contributions by ElinS

‎11-19-2019

Hi Erin, Yes it does look like that, that's what is a bit strange about it. There is only one check in the batch job (the composite check), but somehow it generates two types of results. The check is exactly the same as the check that I ran as a separate check which only generated the 2 results. Thanks for your help!

‎11-19-2019

After some further testing, I found out that I get different results for exactly the same check when I run the check separately (Run data check) and when I run the check as part of batch job (Batch validate on toolbar or GP tool Execute reviewer batch job). The first option (single check) gives the expected results: Lines of FC A that do not intersect (in the form of a line) with lines of FC B and are not within FC C. This gives the first 2 results in the print screen below. The second option (the same check, but now as part of batch job) gives a different result: the 2 results mentioned above and 7 other results, which seem to be related only to the second part of the composite check (FC A not within FC C). These 7 results are visible in the REVTABLEMAIN and somehow also have a separate CHECKRUNID, but this check is not included in the REVCHECKRUNTABLE. I expect it has somehting to do with the workspaces of the feature classes. FC A and B are in a separate file geodatabase, while FC C is in another enterprise geodatabase. Does anyone know if this is normal behaviour and/or how I can run this check as part of a batch job and still get the right result? Thank you!

‎11-15-2019

Hello, I am working with the Data reviewer to run monthly checks on our data. I am struggeling to understand how the Composite check works, espcially in combination with the *Not option. I hope someone has more experience with this check and can help clarify how it works. For example, if I have two line feature classes (A, B) and 1 polygon feature class (C) and I would like to get the following result: Lines of FC A that do not intersect (in the form of line, relation: 1********) with lines of FC B (check 1) and are also not within polygons of FC C (check 2). In the results I still see lines of FC A that intersect with FC B, so it probably does not work the way I think it works. Can someone help explain how this check works? Thank you!

‎08-07-2019

Hi Xander, Thank you so much for all these helpful links. It's a pity that there's no beginners course on Arcade yet, but hopefully I will be able to get started with the help of these resources and a bit of trial and error. If I don't succeed, I would be very happy to get some help with a few test expressions. But I will give it a try first. Thanks for your help!

‎08-06-2019

Hi Xander, Thank you very much for your help. I am new to this all, so the rules I am creating now are just to get an idea of what is possible and to get more acquainted with Arcade. I can understand that one might want to be careful with the number of geometry-on-geometry constraint type rules, in order to keep a good performance. The case I am working with involves culverts and waterways. The culverts (<> type 1) should coincide with waterways. In the Datareviewer in Arcmap I used the geometry on geometry check (spatial relation type: Within, ) to identify features that are not in that relationship. I am now trying to redo this check as a constraint attribute rule. What do you think would be the best approach for this situation? I have seen some examples in UC videos, but I still find it difficult to translate these to my own situation. Do you know if there is going be some kind of Arcade course for beginners on the Esri academy? Thank you so much!

‎08-05-2019

I have been working with the Data reviewer in ArcMap and am now exploring the Data reviewer and Attribute rules in Pro. Currently, I am trying to create a few constraint type attribute rules with Arcade, but for some rules I have not been able to get the right result. I don't have any scripting experience, so working with the Arcade expressions is still a bit of a challenge for me. I would like to create a rule for a line feature class (FC1) stating that this line (except for lines of type 1) should always be on top of a line from another feature class (FC2). I have been able to create a rule with the Intersects function, but of course this rule still approves lines from FC1 that only cross or partly intersect lines from FC2. This is the rule I created: var FC2 = FeatureSetByName($datastore, "FC2",["objectid"], true); var int = Intersects(FC2, Geometry($feature)); if (First(int) == null && $feature.FC1TYPE != 1) return false; else return true; Now I would like to replace the Intersects function with a Within function, but I don't know how to do this. I have tried several options, but none of them seem to work properly. In most cases all edits/inserts are seen as actions that are violating the rule. It probably has something to do with the output of the function, either being featureset or a boolean. It's not yet clear to me when the geometry functions return a boolean or a featureset. I know there are also a few ready-to-use rules which don't require custom Arcade expressions, but I would like to learn how to create these expressions. I have also looked at several examples of Attribute rules, but I find it difficult to translate these to my situation. Most of the examples are still a bit too complicated for me. Can someone show me how I can recreate this rule with a Within function? Thank you very much!

Online Status	Offline
Date Last Visited	‎11-11-2020 02:24 AM

My Ideas

Latest Contributions by ElinS

Re: How does the composite check work with the *not option?

Re: How does the composite check work with the *not option?

How does the composite check work with the *not option?

Re: Attribute rule - example with Within function

Re: Attribute rule - example with Within function

Attribute rule - example with Within function

Re: Attribute rule - example with Within function