When exporting a Survey123 hosted feature layer to csv or excel the column names are showing the labels as set up in the XLSX file. There must surely be a way to export to csv or excel format using the field names?
It can be done by exporting to FGDB, but what about users that don't have access to ArcMap or ArcGIS Pro?
Thanks,
Grant
Solved! Go to Solution.
Actually this is super easy, barely an inconvenience.
At design-time, you can populate the column bind::esri:fieldAlias with the column label you want to see in the Excel. Changing this after the initial publishing appears to have no effect though.
If you have already published the survey, you can change the DisplayName in the AGOL Feature Layer to be the value you want to see in Excel, the next Excel export will pickup the change.
Hi @GrantBenn1 ,
Survey123 uses the export capability built in to ArcGIS Online, which does not have the ability to choose between field names or aliases at this time.
Hi James,
Is there any intention to include this ability? The fact that it currently exports Survey123 hosted feature layers to csv or excel only with the question labels is not ideal. I have a survey where many of the questions have the same label, but for different categories of things separated with groups.
Thanks,
Grant
Exporting display names rather than field names as column headers in a csv file seems like a bug to me. They are called "display names" and "field names" for a reason, right? Esri should fix this ASAP.
Actually this is super easy, barely an inconvenience.
At design-time, you can populate the column bind::esri:fieldAlias with the column label you want to see in the Excel. Changing this after the initial publishing appears to have no effect though.
If you have already published the survey, you can change the DisplayName in the AGOL Feature Layer to be the value you want to see in Excel, the next Excel export will pickup the change.
Thanks a lot, this is exactly what I needed.
Barely an inconvenience? Um. I would disagree, especially since to do what you suggest, you would need to be the owner of the content.