<?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 Electric Utility Network Foundation related tables not part the feature dataset in Electric Questions</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/electric-questions/electric-utility-network-foundation-related-tables/m-p/679160#M617</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm looking at the new&amp;nbsp;Electric Utility Network Foundation Naperville demo data and have noticed&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Some relationship classes under the feature dataset and some are not&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;The tables become versioned when the dataset is versioned. Assume this is done due to the relationship class&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;&amp;nbsp;There are 2 relationship classes doing the same thing&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Without knowing what tools are available to manage the data in these related tables as I can't find any documentation on these, is there standard/preferred way of how this should be structured as the current layout of the feature classes/tables looks misleading?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;My original thought would be to have all feature classes, relationship classes and tables that participate in the UNF would be placed all under the feature dataset.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Based on what is currently there, can anybody expand the capability with user defined tables &amp;amp; relationship classes?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2019 00:53:39 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>AnthonyRyanEQL</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2019-07-04T00:53:39Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Electric Utility Network Foundation related tables not part the feature dataset</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/electric-questions/electric-utility-network-foundation-related-tables/m-p/679160#M617</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Hi all,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;I'm looking at the new&amp;nbsp;Electric Utility Network Foundation Naperville demo data and have noticed&lt;/P&gt;&lt;UL&gt;&lt;LI&gt;Some relationship classes under the feature dataset and some are not&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;The tables become versioned when the dataset is versioned. Assume this is done due to the relationship class&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;LI&gt;&amp;nbsp;There are 2 relationship classes doing the same thing&lt;/LI&gt;&lt;/UL&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Without knowing what tools are available to manage the data in these related tables as I can't find any documentation on these, is there standard/preferred way of how this should be structured as the current layout of the feature classes/tables looks misleading?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;My original thought would be to have all feature classes, relationship classes and tables that participate in the UNF would be placed all under the feature dataset.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Also,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Based on what is currently there, can anybody expand the capability with user defined tables &amp;amp; relationship classes?&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jul 2019 00:53:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/electric-questions/electric-utility-network-foundation-related-tables/m-p/679160#M617</guid>
      <dc:creator>AnthonyRyanEQL</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-07-04T00:53:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Electric Utility Network Foundation related tables not part the feature dataset</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/electric-questions/electric-utility-network-foundation-related-tables/m-p/679161#M618</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;I will log an issue to move the Relationship classes into the Feature Dataset.&amp;nbsp; Looks like just an oversight.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We would prefer to move the tables into the feature dataset also, but the GDB does not support that at the moment.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;We do not have a workflow that describes the editing process, but these diagrams describe their use:&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c957d7a091be4b1e942b5c82883f6f66"&gt;https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/c957d7a091be4b1e942b5c82883f6f66&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;A href="https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/903a7b52bd644b05897395e2ccc00400"&gt;https://storymaps.arcgis.com/stories/903a7b52bd644b05897395e2ccc00400&lt;/A&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2019 03:32:42 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/electric-questions/electric-utility-network-foundation-related-tables/m-p/679161#M618</guid>
      <dc:creator>MikeMillerGIS</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-07-24T03:32:42Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Electric Utility Network Foundation related tables not part the feature dataset</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/electric-questions/electric-utility-network-foundation-related-tables/m-p/679162#M619</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;Michael,&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thankyou for clarifying this. I assumed at the moment workflow to add data to these related tables is just the standard workflow to add data to any related table that might exist with an geodatabase.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;If we wanted a more integrated solution then the utility/partner will implement their own tool to satisfy their own requirements.&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;&lt;/P&gt;&lt;P&gt;Thanks again&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2019 03:54:15 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/electric-questions/electric-utility-network-foundation-related-tables/m-p/679162#M619</guid>
      <dc:creator>AnthonyRyanEQL</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-07-24T03:54:15Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Electric Utility Network Foundation related tables not part the feature dataset</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/electric-questions/electric-utility-network-foundation-related-tables/m-p/679163#M620</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;P&gt;That is correct&lt;/P&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 24 Jul 2019 04:00:48 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/electric-questions/electric-utility-network-foundation-related-tables/m-p/679163#M620</guid>
      <dc:creator>MikeMillerGIS</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2019-07-24T04:00:48Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

