Latest Contributions by PhilipMorrison

Ken, I actually have no idea how you would do what you are suggesting.  I am still a relative rookie when it comes to ArcMap.  However, my comment relates to why you would want to do it in the first place. The first thought that comes to my mind is how were these data points collected?  Why are the coordinates for the known location different from the actual coordinates?  Is it due to the accuracy of the GPS device?  Is it a hand-held device as opposed to a survey-level device?  That would explain the discrepancy. If the discrepancy between the coordinates you obtained and the actual coordinates of the known location are due to the accuracy of the GPS used, you cannot assume that the discrepancy between the coordinates for the other points and the "true" coordinates would be the same in terms of direction and distance.  Every point taken would have its' own level of accuracy in direction and distance.  In fact, dependiing on how many points are involved, the odds are that some of them may be spot on.  Trying to adjust all of the points based on the known location may actually make them less accurate. That's my $0.02 worth. Phil ... View more

I would agree with OZGeo on the Points >> Lines >> Polygons order (from top to bottom).  The layers within each of these groups can then be grouped according to "importance."  As to what consitutes more important, I imagine, would depend on what you are trying to show or what is the focus of your map. As for layers like hydrology and contours, I put the major items below the minor ones.  I look at it this way; the major items are the "base" from which the detailed items are derived (at least in the contours and, in some sense, the hydrology).  The finer contours and the finer streams can be thought of as subdivisions of the major contours and rivers.  These are, in essence, "supported" by the major levels and should probably go above them in the legend. I also liken it to building a structure.  The heavier items go on the bottom.  So, the polygons go on the bottom, then come the lines, then the points.  Within each category, again, the heavier items should go on the bottom and the lighter - or finer, more detailed - items go above them. That's my $0.02 worth. ... View more

Thank you very much.  That solved my problem. Phil You can force legend to create multiple columns by selecting 'Place in new column' for layer which should be in new column and leaving number of columns=1. Look at this picture: [ATTACH=CONFIG]12545[/ATTACH] Only the FC4 is selected to 'Place in new column' and number of columns in 'Columns:' field is left default (1) for each layer. All the layers below FC4 (in 'Legend Items:' list) are placed in this new column. If you for example addictionaly select FC7 to 'Place in new column', there will be 3 columns in legend: 1: FC1,FC2,FC3; 2: FC4,FC5,FC6; 3: FC7,FC8. You can achieve this same effect by setting numbers of columns in 'Columns:' field to 2 for FC4 and leaving 'Place in new column' unselected: [ATTACH=CONFIG]12546[/ATTACH] ... View more

David & Tom, Thanks for the input.  I tried David's suggestion of using the <LIN> tag for inidividual lines within a text block but couldn't seem to get it to work.  I ended up creating three text boxes and adjusting the leading within each of them.  By using a leading of -1, I was able to tighten up the spacing within the block and then I spaced out the blocks a little.  It looks a lot better.  Thanks again for the input. ... View more

I have a test shapefile (line data) that was exported from a CAD-based program called MineScape.  The file does not have a spatial reference, and I ran the Define Projection tool under Data Management.  However, although the shapefile properties now indicate that it has been changed to NAD 1983 UTM Zone 12N, the shapefile does not display anywhere near the actual location.  I also tested the Project tool, and had the "Inconsistent Extent" error. Does anyone have any thoughts on steps I may have missed?  Also, are there tricks for exporting CAD data (either as .dwg, .dxf, or .shp) with a spatial reference that I can pass on to the engineer?  Thank you very much. I was never able to get that to work either.  However, I was able to import the DWG file itself into ArcMap.  You first have to define the projection.  Make sure you define the projection to what it was drawn in, not the projection of your map (it took me a couple of tries before I realized that.  Duh!!).  For example, our engineers use the state plane system.  I also discovered that I need to have the DWG file saved in an earlier version of AutoCAD.  I am using ArcMAP 9.3 and it doesn't seem to be able to convert the more recent versions of AutoCAD, so I have the engineer save me a copy in the 2004 format.  After it is projected, I just add it to the map.  Then I export the various layers that I need to individual shapefiles and add them to the map. I don't know if this is the best way to do this, or if it will work for you, but it works for me (so far!). ... View more