I am a beginner with Arcade expressions and I would like to only display points that are within certain polygons. I have points scattered across several large polygons and would like to only symbolize those points that intersect one polygon. How do I accomplish this without conducting a spatial join and adding a field to the point data set?
Hi Ray Danser ,
When using Arcade and symbolizing data based on another layer, you will end up creating a field and doing a field calculation to extract the polygon name or id, since in the symbology profile you have no access to other features. You can however create a hosted feature layer view and select the points that are within that specific polygon: https://doc.arcgis.com/en/arcgis-online/manage-data/create-hosted-views.htm
I guess my question wasn't specific enough. I am currently working with 6 different applications that contain the same parent data sets. Each application contains a ward within my city's boundaries. The points span the entire city. Each ward application only needs the points that are within the boundaries of that ward to be visible. Unfortunately, I do not own the point data set, so adding a field containing ward information is not an option. The point data updates frequently, so creating a static layer is not an option. The FeatureSetByName function was my first thought, but that does not work with styling. Is this something that is possible without adding another field to the original data set? Something tells me that this sort of on-the-fly spatial query is not possible.
Hi Ray Danser ,
Thanks for clarifying the situation. I would probably go for the hosted feature layer view to define areas that are relevant for each ward, but you will have to be the owner of the data to do that. Is it possible to reach out to the owner for this?
I sure do. Thank you for the assistance Xander! I just didn't want to be turning my wheels over here if I didn't have to. I appreciate your time!
Sorry. I just read my reply and realized it was not clear. I do know the owner of the data, so I will discuss further with them. Thanks again!