Order of features available to collect

2109
4
12-05-2013 10:34 AM
DominickCisson
Occasional Contributor
I have created a map service based on a locally hosted ArcGIS Server feature service containing a number of sign types for collection and editing.  In the .MXD that defines the feature service, the sign layer template is setup with the signs in a specific, alphabetic order.  In the feature service that is published from said .MXD, the signs are still in their alphabetic order.  Once I put the feature service into an ArcGIS online web map and open it in collector however, the sign types are completely randomized, with no order whatsoever.  Why?  FWIW, this is all 10.2 from top to bottom, so no easy outs here saying, "Upgrade to the latest version" ;)
Tags (2)
0 Kudos
4 Replies
RussellRoberts1
Esri Frequent Contributor
Can you share the service and I can take a look at it or can you post screen grabs of the rest endpoint? Does the Drawing Info mirror the Types:?

Thanks
Russ
0 Kudos
DominickCisson
Occasional Contributor
Here's the link:  http://gistest.arapahoegov.com/arcgis/rest/services/Sign_Editor_2/FeatureServer/0

   And no, the drawing info and Types do not match up.  The drawing info list is in order, while the types list is in the randomized order I'm seeing in the map service.  So there's the cause of the mis-ordered signs, but how do I set the order of Types to match the drawing order?
0 Kudos
GISSupport3
Regular Contributor
Me too ... 10.2.1

Any solutions?

Thanks
0 Kudos
DavinShokes1
Occasional Contributor
Apparently known issue. http://forums.arcgis.com/threads/86140-Wrong-Feature-Template-Order
Sort of glad more people are encountering this. Maybe it will be solved quicker.
Support closed an incident after logging this - "enhancement: Provide a way to adjust the order of feature types listed for a hosted feature service layer published from ArcGIS Desktop. "

I'm not sure how others feel, but I wish someone could outline exactly what the predecessor is for feature types before publishing and when, if ever does this non-alphabetical sort of feature templates occur. The Potential enhancement would just create another step before each final web map. If the user knows where feature types and templates originate, as well as the impacts different domain and subtype combinations have, then each published service doesn't need this extra adjustment.

Good luck, doesn't look addressed in 10.2.2 update.
Davin
0 Kudos