<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic Best practice for managing projection/coordinate systems with feature services? Collecting results skew based on technique. in ArcGIS Online Questions</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-online-questions/best-practice-for-managing-projection-coordinate/m-p/1147616#M44588</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;Is there advice out there for how to handle projections when collecting data in a feature service? Our workflow involves collecting polygon data from disparate areas, and we've been having field workers append locally-collected data to a feature service so it can be QC'd and pulled down by a data steward. Results seem to differ depending on various techniques, and I do not know how best to standardize it.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Standard display for items on AGOL is WGS 1984. However, if you publish a layer to AGOL it retains the spatial reference it was published in (or at least it says it does). Below is a feature service, accessed in Pro, that seems to have retained the spatial reference of the original feature class.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="SFM_TravisBott_0-1645722605357.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.esri.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/34897iE9B2B8DDC4BE0C24/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="SFM_TravisBott_0-1645722605357.png" alt="SFM_TravisBott_0-1645722605357.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;First question: &lt;EM&gt;Should one&lt;/EM&gt; make sure a feature service stays in the intended output feature class? We will ultimately archive the data in Teale Albers; is it best practice to have the feature class projected as such so as to not skew out put?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Second question: I have noticed changes happen as data is transformed going in/out of feature classes, and I would like to pinpoint the issue.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For this scenario, the feature service is in WGS 1984. Local parent data is in Teale Albers. Map is in Teale Albers. When&amp;nbsp;&lt;U&gt;&lt;EM&gt;appending&lt;/EM&gt; &lt;/U&gt;the data to the feature service it gets skewed. When it gets exported back out to Teale Albers it&amp;nbsp;&lt;EM&gt;remains&lt;/EM&gt; skewed. See below.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-center" image-alt="SFM_TravisBott_2-1645723559608.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.esri.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/34901i60CA7231EB44F311/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="SFM_TravisBott_2-1645723559608.png" alt="SFM_TravisBott_2-1645723559608.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;However, if the original data is added to the feature service by Copy/Paste, it remains correct, both as projected in the feature service and upon export.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If data is re-projected to WGS 84 prior to appending, then exported in Teale Albers, the output would be correct. I would like to avoid having field staff re-project their data prior to appending, so want to know how to set up the service properly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;So:&lt;/STRONG&gt; What is the appropriate technique for managing projection differences in our workflow? If we plan to collect locally stored polygons in a feature service, and then export them in a particular projection, should the feature service&amp;nbsp;&lt;EM&gt;be&lt;/EM&gt; in that projection? Is this further complicated if we&amp;nbsp;&lt;EM&gt;also&lt;/EM&gt; want to collect data in the same feature service on a mobile device?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2022 17:31:17 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>SFM_TravisBott</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2022-02-24T17:31:17Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Best practice for managing projection/coordinate systems with feature services? Collecting results skew based on technique.</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-online-questions/best-practice-for-managing-projection-coordinate/m-p/1147616#M44588</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;Is there advice out there for how to handle projections when collecting data in a feature service? Our workflow involves collecting polygon data from disparate areas, and we've been having field workers append locally-collected data to a feature service so it can be QC'd and pulled down by a data steward. Results seem to differ depending on various techniques, and I do not know how best to standardize it.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Standard display for items on AGOL is WGS 1984. However, if you publish a layer to AGOL it retains the spatial reference it was published in (or at least it says it does). Below is a feature service, accessed in Pro, that seems to have retained the spatial reference of the original feature class.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-inline" image-alt="SFM_TravisBott_0-1645722605357.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.esri.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/34897iE9B2B8DDC4BE0C24/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="SFM_TravisBott_0-1645722605357.png" alt="SFM_TravisBott_0-1645722605357.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;First question: &lt;EM&gt;Should one&lt;/EM&gt; make sure a feature service stays in the intended output feature class? We will ultimately archive the data in Teale Albers; is it best practice to have the feature class projected as such so as to not skew out put?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Second question: I have noticed changes happen as data is transformed going in/out of feature classes, and I would like to pinpoint the issue.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;For this scenario, the feature service is in WGS 1984. Local parent data is in Teale Albers. Map is in Teale Albers. When&amp;nbsp;&lt;U&gt;&lt;EM&gt;appending&lt;/EM&gt; &lt;/U&gt;the data to the feature service it gets skewed. When it gets exported back out to Teale Albers it&amp;nbsp;&lt;EM&gt;remains&lt;/EM&gt; skewed. See below.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;span class="lia-inline-image-display-wrapper lia-image-align-center" image-alt="SFM_TravisBott_2-1645723559608.png" style="width: 400px;"&gt;&lt;img src="https://community.esri.com/t5/image/serverpage/image-id/34901i60CA7231EB44F311/image-size/medium?v=v2&amp;amp;px=400" role="button" title="SFM_TravisBott_2-1645723559608.png" alt="SFM_TravisBott_2-1645723559608.png" /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;However, if the original data is added to the feature service by Copy/Paste, it remains correct, both as projected in the feature service and upon export.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If data is re-projected to WGS 84 prior to appending, then exported in Teale Albers, the output would be correct. I would like to avoid having field staff re-project their data prior to appending, so want to know how to set up the service properly.&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;STRONG&gt;So:&lt;/STRONG&gt; What is the appropriate technique for managing projection differences in our workflow? If we plan to collect locally stored polygons in a feature service, and then export them in a particular projection, should the feature service&amp;nbsp;&lt;EM&gt;be&lt;/EM&gt; in that projection? Is this further complicated if we&amp;nbsp;&lt;EM&gt;also&lt;/EM&gt; want to collect data in the same feature service on a mobile device?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2022 17:31:17 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-online-questions/best-practice-for-managing-projection-coordinate/m-p/1147616#M44588</guid>
      <dc:creator>SFM_TravisBott</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2022-02-24T17:31:17Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

