<?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: Working with Multipart features in the Parcel Fabric in State &amp; Local Government Questions</title>
    <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/state-local-government-questions/working-with-multipart-features-in-the-parcel/m-p/601160#M3895</link>
    <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;For all of those who have viewed this and/or are interested in a perspective:&amp;nbsp; I put it out to a weekly forum of parcel fabric users and they all prefer going with single part features and then modeling encumbrances separately.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Thanks for viewing!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 20:58:07 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>TiffanyPuett</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2012-05-13T20:58:07Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>Working with Multipart features in the Parcel Fabric</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/state-local-government-questions/working-with-multipart-features-in-the-parcel/m-p/601159#M3894</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;I am doing a little brainstorming and was hoping to gain a few more opinions before making a final decision here:&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Does anyone have a preference in working with multipart vs single part in the fabric?&amp;nbsp; I know there advantages and disadvantages to both, but I like the idea of being able to actually model the description across a road or other obstacle. Thus I would use single part for my parcels and perhaps an unclosed polygon for the encumberance.&amp;nbsp; &lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Thoughts?&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 19:39:56 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/state-local-government-questions/working-with-multipart-features-in-the-parcel/m-p/601159#M3894</guid>
      <dc:creator>TiffanyPuett</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-05-02T19:39:56Z</dc:date>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Re: Working with Multipart features in the Parcel Fabric</title>
      <link>https://community.esri.com/t5/state-local-government-questions/working-with-multipart-features-in-the-parcel/m-p/601160#M3895</link>
      <description>&lt;HTML&gt;&lt;HEAD&gt;&lt;/HEAD&gt;&lt;BODY&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;For all of those who have viewed this and/or are interested in a perspective:&amp;nbsp; I put it out to a weekly forum of parcel fabric users and they all prefer going with single part features and then modeling encumbrances separately.&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;BR /&gt;&lt;SPAN&gt;Thanks for viewing!&lt;/SPAN&gt;&lt;/BODY&gt;&lt;/HTML&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sun, 13 May 2012 20:58:07 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.esri.com/t5/state-local-government-questions/working-with-multipart-features-in-the-parcel/m-p/601160#M3895</guid>
      <dc:creator>TiffanyPuett</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2012-05-13T20:58:07Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

