In the current composite rule check, features are flagged if they satisfy all check conditions. It would be great to have the ability to adjust the rule to flag if they satisfy one of the check conditions.
For example, I have a lots layer inside a parcel fabric. Lot features must be within a subdivision or a survey feature. If I write two separate feature on feature checks, one for subdivisions and one for surveys, this will cause incorrect flags because when a lot is within a subdivision, it won't be within a survey so it would flag on the 'lots within survey' check. The composite rule seemed like the right option, but as it currently stands, it would only flag if a lot is not within a survey AND not within a subdivision.
I know it is possible to write this as a custom Arcade expression, but since the composite rule check already exists, it could be helpful to be able to build a composite rule where you can specify whether it's an 'AND' composite rule or an 'OR' composite rule.
Hello, as I understand the condition, the Lots layer MUST be within EITHER of the Survey Feature OR the Subdivision Feature, as long is within either of this two is OK, however if it's not within EITHER of these features it does represent an ERROR.
If so, this assumption on Composite is incorrect: "The composite rule seemed like the right option, but as it currently stands, it would only flag if a lot is not within a survey AND not within a subdivision."
You can create a Composite rule with two feature on feature conditions where:
Feature on Feature rule 1: Lots FC is not within the Survey Feature (invert relationship)
Feature on Feature rule 2: Lots FC is not within the Subdivision Feature (invert relationship)
If the Lots FC is fully within one of the two secondary features (Subdivision Feature or Survey Feature), it will not flag an error, on the contrary, if the Lots feature not within either of the features Subdivision Feature and Survey Feature then it will create an error.
@FranciscoPerezGiusti You are absolutely right, I feel a little foolish that it was right in front of me like that. Thanks!
I'll leave this idea open in the event that other folks have scenarios that would require an OR condition.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.