<?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 Re: Distance Mismatch Layers and Definition Query Configurations in ArcGIS Parcel Fabric Questions</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-questions/distance-mismatch-layers-and-definition-query/m-p/1603422#M1916</link>
    <description>&lt;P&gt;This would indeed be very useful. This has been something I have had on my list to figure out but have never had the time to research or test. It would be nice if the quality ribbon had this for both fixed distance and by percentage.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2025 19:48:21 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>LucasBeauchamp</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2025-04-07T19:48:21Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Distance Mismatch Layers and Definition Query Configurations</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-questions/distance-mismatch-layers-and-definition-query/m-p/1592534#M1899</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;We love the distance mismatch quality layers offered by the quality ribbon in pro where lines can be added with pre-written definition queries to expose lines that deviate between COGO and shape length by a distance factor that can be adjusted.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;(ABS(ArcLength - Shape_Length) &amp;gt;(0.05 + 0.001*ArcLength) AND RetiredByRecord IS NULL) OR (ABS(Distance - Shape_Length)&amp;gt;(0.5 + 0.001*Distance) AND RetiredByRecord IS NULL)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We are trying to work on language that a definition query can be similarly written, but adjusted to expose lines that deviate from the shape length by a certain &lt;U&gt;percentage&lt;/U&gt;, as opposed to an entered footage distance length (&lt;EM&gt;0.05 feet in the above query expression&lt;/EM&gt;).&amp;nbsp; We prefer this means of finding faulty lines, since our accuracy QC generally dictates we should seek out and verify/correct lines that are deviating in measurement apart from their COGO by a percentage, since, the longer the line is in length, the less of a problem that it is a half foot or one foot, or whatever the threshold is set to.&amp;nbsp; If you set a threshold of 2%, you can find problematic lines that have COGO of 500', 750' or 2000' or more if their measurements are off by more than one foot.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Mar 2025 22:02:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-questions/distance-mismatch-layers-and-definition-query/m-p/1592534#M1899</guid>
      <dc:creator>JasonBessert</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-03-05T22:02:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Distance Mismatch Layers and Definition Query Configurations</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-questions/distance-mismatch-layers-and-definition-query/m-p/1603422#M1916</link>
      <description>&lt;P&gt;This would indeed be very useful. This has been something I have had on my list to figure out but have never had the time to research or test. It would be nice if the quality ribbon had this for both fixed distance and by percentage.&lt;/P&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2025 19:48:21 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-parcel-fabric-questions/distance-mismatch-layers-and-definition-query/m-p/1603422#M1916</guid>
      <dc:creator>LucasBeauchamp</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2025-04-07T19:48:21Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

