<?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: Geometry Types in File Geodatabase API Questions</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/geometry-types/m-p/761979#M1186</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I guess I should have been more clear.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;How about ESRI changing the specification of ESRI FGDB, ArcSDE etc to allow clients to specify that a FGDB file is only allowed to accept a single LineString or Polygon.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;We as developers have no control over what kinds of data external users create in the FGDB format using tools such as ArcMap.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;It could be something as simple as adding extra metadata in the XML description (e.g. &amp;lt;singlePartOnly&amp;gt;true&amp;lt;/singlePartOnly&amp;gt;) that would be enforced by editing applications such as ArcMap.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Pass this along to whoever make decisions in the file format.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Multi part has caused my client (a large regional government ESRI licensee) a lot of hassle when accepting data from external contractors.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2014 14:41:55 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>PaulAustin</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2014-04-07T14:41:55Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Geometry Types</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/geometry-types/m-p/761977#M1184</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;In the FGDB format the Polyline and Polygon allow multi-part geometries. I think it would be beneficial to have new types that restrict &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;linestrings and polygons to single part geometries. Multi-part geometries are a real pain when users visually have lines that look continuous but in reality don't connect at a common vertex.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2014 13:25:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/geometry-types/m-p/761977#M1184</guid>
      <dc:creator>PaulAustin</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-04-04T13:25:06Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Geometry Types</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/geometry-types/m-p/761978#M1185</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Keep in mind that the FGDB API is a manifestation of the ArcObjects code that implements&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;file geodatabases.&amp;nbsp; Adding new types to the API isn't really in the realm of possibility, but&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;you are free to add a wrapper that customizes type representation for your purposes.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;- V&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Apr 2014 16:25:39 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/geometry-types/m-p/761978#M1185</guid>
      <dc:creator>VinceAngelo</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-04-04T16:25:39Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Geometry Types</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/geometry-types/m-p/761979#M1186</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I guess I should have been more clear.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;How about ESRI changing the specification of ESRI FGDB, ArcSDE etc to allow clients to specify that a FGDB file is only allowed to accept a single LineString or Polygon.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;We as developers have no control over what kinds of data external users create in the FGDB format using tools such as ArcMap.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;It could be something as simple as adding extra metadata in the XML description (e.g. &amp;lt;singlePartOnly&amp;gt;true&amp;lt;/singlePartOnly&amp;gt;) that would be enforced by editing applications such as ArcMap.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Pass this along to whoever make decisions in the file format.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Multi part has caused my client (a large regional government ESRI licensee) a lot of hassle when accepting data from external contractors.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2014 14:41:55 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/geometry-types/m-p/761979#M1186</guid>
      <dc:creator>PaulAustin</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-04-07T14:41:55Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Geometry Types</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/geometry-types/m-p/761980#M1187</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Enhancement requests can be submitted via &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;A href="http://ideas.esri.com"&gt;ideas.esri.com&lt;/A&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;, but I doubt &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;those that make decisions will approve such a significant change.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Fortunately, there are other solutions to the data validation problem.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;- V&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2014 18:43:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/file-geodatabase-api-questions/geometry-types/m-p/761980#M1187</guid>
      <dc:creator>VinceAngelo</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2014-04-07T18:43:14Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

