Auto-calculate geometry attributes

04-17-2014 12:56 PM
Status: Open
Occasional Contributor III

I believe there should be a way of auto-calculating geometry attributes for a feature class.  Kind of like editor tracking fields in that they are system maintained and defined by the user.

For example, if I have fields meant to store Longitude and Latitude, a tab would be available to select which field I wanted to store the longitude value and which field I wanted to store the latitude value.  These fields would then be system maintained and I wouldn't have to worry about calculating geometry.

A similar option could be available for polygon features...different types of areas: acres, square feet, square meters, hectares, etc, etc...


Hi Matthew Boyle‌,

Have you looked into the Attribute Assistant Shape Update methods: Shape updates - Attribute Assistant | ArcGIS Solutions ?

These might work to automatically populate polygon area (and then you could trigger an Expression method to convert to Acres, Square Miles, etc. using a conversion: All methods - Attribute Assistant | ArcGIS Solutions )

Check out the X Coordinate and Y Coordinate methods to answer the question about auto-populating Lat and Lon fields All methods - Attribute Assistant | ArcGIS Solutions 


Kory Kramer‌,

We use Attribute Assistant for a variety of things here, however Attribute Assistant is confined to ArcMap.  Our organization is using Collector more and more for mobile data collection, and with these edits taking place outside of ArcMap, it would be nice to have a similar function at the database level.  We have implemented Sql triggers within our RDBMS to auto-populate fields in a similar fashion as to what Attribute Assistant does...however, I think it would be nice to have Esri controlled procedures that are supported.

It's a bit of a hassle to have field staff collect data and then have someone with ArcMap be responsible for back-populating attributes when they have time or realize it needs to be done.


Thanks for the details.  So what you're really asking for is ‌  I'd encourage you to add your vote there if you haven't already.


Also, see my comment on that thread.  Attribute Rules are coming to ArcGIS Pro in a future release and the idea is that Attribute Assistant-like rules can be written that will work across the ArcGIS Platform.  So keep an eye on those as it sounds like it will be what you're looking for.



If the Attribute Rules are being designed to work across the ArcGIS Platform, is it even architecturely realistic for AR to be able to be used in any other database besides an enterprise gdb (e.g. file gdb)?


I think in asking the question, you know the answer.  

If Attribute Rules are running out of a file gdb, you'll have capabilities similar to Attribute Assistant; i.e. the rules work locally, can't work with services, can't work in ArcGIS Online, can't work in apps...  And that is fine and will work for some people.

If users need to run Attribute Rules across the platform, it will require the implementation which is already in place and available to users.


So doesn't that mean AR will never function with a file gdb?  If that's the case then how could the idea of AR in a file gdb still be Under Consideration?


I guess I don't understand your question.  Today, you can create rules in an enterprise gdb that are triggered for fields when edits (insert, update, delete) are made... It would just be the same thing but would work in file gdb.  When set up for a file gdb, I think the expectation is that the rules would not work across the platform (just like Attribute Assistant).


Ok, so you are saying that AR can get implemented in a file gdb, it's just that the ARs will not be available across the entire platform.  This would be fine as my org would use the file gdb to prototype ARs before deploying them into an enterprise gdb.  That is the workflow that has been employed when working with Attribute Assistant in ArcMap.  Prototyping in the file gdb helps to detect issues with AA, so it is a really useful first step in deployment.