Feature Request: Symbology Level Definition Query in ArcGIS Pro

[rsun_TQB]

Description:

I would like to propose a new feature for ArcGIS Pro called "Symbology Level Definition Query". This feature would allow users to build definition queries for each unique value within a symbology. This functionality exists in platforms like MapGuide and Autodesk Civil 3D, offering users dynamic and granular control over data visualization.

Benefits:

• Enhanced Customization: Users can tailor symbology directly to specific data conditions, allowing for complex data visualization.
• Efficient Data Management: Streamlines the process of managing large datasets by allowing users to apply unique filters per symbology.
• Improved Visualization: Offers more precise representation of data, making it easier to distinguish between different conditions or asset types on a map.

Example Use Cases:

• In municipal asset management, where different asset types and their statuses need to be shown distinctly, such a feature would allow linking a definition query that highlights specific asset conditions (e.g., benches available for re-sale or metal benches with no owner status).

This feature would bring ArcGIS Pro's symbology functionality to another level, promoting precision and clarity in data representation.

[AlfredBaldenweck]

After thinking about it, I think this is a good idea.

The current symbology is basically a really, really low-tech SQL editor and doesn't allow you a lot of choice out of the box. You can symbolize by unique values field by field or with Arcade, but you get limited to just whatever fields you feed it. Even manually adding values (green plus sign) limits you to the field(s) you've provided already.

In the example provided, there are three fields in use across 8 symbol classes: Asset_Group, Asset_Type, and Status. As it currently stands, to get this sort of symbology, you would have to symbolize by all three fields, then manually group the ones you want into the final 8 classes. Taking what's been provided, Asset_Type has 5 given options, Asset_Group has 2, and Status has 2. That's 20 different permutations that Pro spits out at you, and honestly, having only 2 options in any given field is kind of rare. 

So, from a simple ease of use standpoint, I think this would be helpful.

The other thing is that this exact functionality exists for label classes already, so it would follow that it exists for symbol classes.

I think having some sort of toggle under unique values, or adding a Unique Values (SQL) option to the dropdown would be helpful.

[TanuHoque]

Thanks for submitting this idea. Please keep adding other workflows or use cases where you will find this enhancement helpful.

[AlfredBaldenweck]

Here's another use case:

I have a user who wants to join a table to the feature class, then do a spatial join, then depending on the contents of the joined tables, split it out into 6 distinct layers so she can turn them off and on. These criteria have no overlap.

• Owner 1 (from spatial join) (Group Layer)
  • Type 1 (join table)
  • Type 2 (join table)
• Owner 2 (from spatial join) (Group Layer)
  • Type 1 (join table)
  • Type 3 (join table)
• Owner 3 (from spatial join) (Group Layer)
  • Type 4 (join table)
  • Type 2 (join table)

This idea, combined with the newly released ability to turn off individual symbol classes in the contents pane, would simplify the process a lot by letting us choose precisely the criteria we want without having 6 different layers with 6 different properties windows, and instead let us do it all in one place. (And also simplify the queries a lot-- if I can apply a general definition query that filters out everything I don't want based on two fields in the properties window, I can focus on the two or three fields I actually care about in the symbology pane instead. Much cleaner than each of the 6 layers having 5 or 6 clauses in the properties window definition query.)

Again, currently we could just add all the fields we want, but in this case there are 10s of options in each field we care about, meaning that we very, very quickly get 100s of symbol classes that need to grouped down into something manageable.