Relationship classes are what I would consider a basic necessity of database behavior. Not a join or a link within an ArcMap MXD...I mean the ability to create these relationships within the database itself. The ability to create and edit feature classes that participate in a relationship class is very important for and supports related GIS tasks. Two examples follow:
- Dynamic geocoding. (Example: Health department has provider lists that changes peridocially and would like to update a simple table and have geocoded positions update). Can't do with ArcView.
- Editing related tables collected via ArcPad. (Example: Roads department inventories signs and has a relationship class between sign features and a maintenance table with basic inspection dates and maintenance actions. Can collect this with ArcPad but can't check back in to a feature dataset with a relationship class using ArcView licensing). Can't do with ArcView.
Granted coding may exist that can circumvent these limitations, but I cannot fathom why these tasks require advanced licensing to perform out-of-the-box. Relationships within a database represent what I believe to be standard relational database behavior. MS Access supports relationships within the database and that is the basis for the personal GDB so the capability is there. I would just like to stump for a retooling of the licensing at ESRI to support relationship classes at the ArcView licensing level. It would expand the capabilities of so many users and allow them to do much more with the software without the prohibitive expense/overkill of ArcEditor/Info.
