<?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: Access to relationship-rules in ArcGIS Pro SDK Questions</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-sdk-questions/access-to-relationship-rules/m-p/788621#M1388</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Ritch,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you for your posting. But bad news! Caching Python isn't a solution.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As a consequence - not only in context of annotations - &lt;STRONG&gt;relationships are always unusable &lt;/STRONG&gt;in the current Pro Version (2.5). In a UN usually we have less featureclasses, and many many AssetGroups/AssetTypes. What will be the reaction of our customers, if we ask him always for the relation to serve in a dialog? I think he didn't accept!&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Essential for migration &lt;EM&gt;ArcMap&lt;/EM&gt; to &lt;EM&gt;ArcGIS Pro&lt;/EM&gt; is customer acceptance. A long-term consideration didn't help.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;--Dirk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:26:25 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>DirkTillmanns</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-02-17T07:26:25Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Access to relationship-rules</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-sdk-questions/access-to-relationship-rules/m-p/788617#M1384</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm working with feature-linked-annotations. In Pro relationship dialog, I have defined relationship-rules between subtypes in the origin- and the destination (annotation)class.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I want to access this rules by the c# SDK. But neither the "RelationshipClass", nor the "RelationshipClass.GetDefinition()" contains corresponding methods.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Can anybody help?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Dirk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2020 08:41:11 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-sdk-questions/access-to-relationship-rules/m-p/788617#M1384</guid>
      <dc:creator>DirkTillmanns</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-13T08:41:11Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Access to relationship-rules</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-sdk-questions/access-to-relationship-rules/m-p/788618#M1385</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Dirk,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;This information isn't available through the Pro SDK. &amp;nbsp;Could you share some more information about what you are trying to accomplish?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;--Rich&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Feb 2020 20:15:51 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-sdk-questions/access-to-relationship-rules/m-p/788618#M1385</guid>
      <dc:creator>RichRuh</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-13T20:15:51Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Access to relationship-rules</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-sdk-questions/access-to-relationship-rules/m-p/788619#M1386</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Rich,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I have implement a MapTool for labeling existing line features in the UN. First the user has to select a line in the map. Only line features with related linked AnnotationFeatureClasses will be considered. Next the user has to define the labeling &lt;BR /&gt;position by an oriented text feedback next to the nearest linesegment. The linked annotation feature has to be created at this MapPoint. &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Normaly the line features have different AssetGroups. Each line feature has to be labeled with a different symbolisation.&lt;BR /&gt;So I have defined corresponding rules in the relationshipclass. As the result, the rules would provide the AnnotationClassId corresponding to the selected feature AssetGroup. I could create the annotationfeature with the requested symbol.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Because the rules are not available in the Pro SDK this fails. (In python the rule are accessable!)&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;IMG class="image-1 jive-image" src="https://community.esri.com/legacyfs/online/482201_pastedImage_2.png" /&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;In this workaround I could not work with templates and inspector. I'm working with an editoperation-callback. I'm storing the involved features explicit.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Dirk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2020 07:32:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-sdk-questions/access-to-relationship-rules/m-p/788619#M1386</guid>
      <dc:creator>DirkTillmanns</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-14T07:32:45Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Access to relationship-rules</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-sdk-questions/access-to-relationship-rules/m-p/788620#M1387</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Dirk-&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Could you use Python/&amp;nbsp;geoprocessing to build a cache of this information, and then access it from within the editoperation-callback?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I don't have any other suggestions&amp;nbsp;in the short-term, but I'll add this for consideration in a future release.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;--Rich&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Feb 2020 22:14:44 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-sdk-questions/access-to-relationship-rules/m-p/788620#M1387</guid>
      <dc:creator>RichRuh</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-14T22:14:44Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Access to relationship-rules</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-sdk-questions/access-to-relationship-rules/m-p/788621#M1388</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi Ritch,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thank you for your posting. But bad news! Caching Python isn't a solution.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;As a consequence - not only in context of annotations - &lt;STRONG&gt;relationships are always unusable &lt;/STRONG&gt;in the current Pro Version (2.5). In a UN usually we have less featureclasses, and many many AssetGroups/AssetTypes. What will be the reaction of our customers, if we ask him always for the relation to serve in a dialog? I think he didn't accept!&amp;nbsp; &lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Essential for migration &lt;EM&gt;ArcMap&lt;/EM&gt; to &lt;EM&gt;ArcGIS Pro&lt;/EM&gt; is customer acceptance. A long-term consideration didn't help.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;--Dirk&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Feb 2020 07:26:25 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-sdk-questions/access-to-relationship-rules/m-p/788621#M1388</guid>
      <dc:creator>DirkTillmanns</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-02-17T07:26:25Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

