While Profile Charts allow a user to select either Z or M value for the y-axis, users are restricted to only distance on the x-axis. Having the ability to select m-value for the x-axis while plotting z on the y-axis allows chart comparison for features not starting at the same location.
Example Situation: Transect topographic profiles are collected using RTK GNSS data across landscapes along generally the same path following a digital collection transect line. However, starting point cannot be monumented so exact starting location is not guaranteed to be same. As it stands now with only distance on the x-axis, any horizontal offset is not due to due landscape change, but differences in transect starting location. Collected transect lines can be snapped to the digital collection line and m-value distance from that collection line assigned by linear referencing. By allowing m-value as the x-axis value, it would then be possible to plot overlapping transect lines such that relative feature locations are at the same horizontal position and any change in horizontal position is due to topographic change.
This is the scenario for the attached images. Beach transects are collected by students following a path on ArcGIS Field Maps. Students are not always able to start at the exact same location. For one of the three transects, students started farther back, which for the two subsequent transect collections they started farther along the line. Because of this, when then three transect profiles are overlayed, they do not appropriately overlap (offset profiles image). Currently, the only workaround that I know would be to reverse the line direction, continue the feature to a standard location, reverse line direction again, and then change the y-axis value range. This edit then results in the Offset Profiles image. This matters because snapping, assigning appropriate m-values, and data updating can all be automated whereas the line editing process is manual.
