I know this question is already asked in a similiar way but still, I want to ask if it is possible to use the full extent of an integer format (2.147.483.647) somehow. I use an integer field to get monetary amounts. They can reach up to 2 billions. So Integer should work fine but instead only 9 digits are possible in Survey123 even if I set an Input mask to 0000000000.
Any suggestions to solve this Problem without using a text field?
Thank you!
Hi Ramona
I am curious as to why you dont use a decimal for a currency value?
Hey Deon,
there was actually no need for digits after the comma and actually also integer is enough as value range.
Hi Ramona,
The issue with integer fields being limited to 9 digits has actually now been fixed in the 3.4 beta builds which are available on EAC here: https://earlyadopter.esri.com/project/version/default.html?cap=e69ef91f45744b98882c651f7b518eb7&artt...
This fix will be made available in the next release, currently there is no way to work around it in the app as it is a hard coded limitation due to underlying issues that have now been resolved.
Phil.
Hey Philip,
this sounds perfect! Is there already a plan when the next release will be available?
At this stage we are arming for the mid to end of May.
Phili
Dear Philip,
I am facing this issue in version 3.9.
Details:
- I have prepared a survey using https://survey123.arcgis.com/ version 3.9 and have used Number field with only integer values to capture phone numbers (10 digits).
- I have applied min- 1000000000 & Max-9999999999 (value restriction) to the field.
Issues faced:
- If opened this survey in Survey123 app (version 3.9.148) installed on my phone (Android 8.1.0) and Phone number field (integer) is not accepting more than 9 digits.
Findings:
- Same field works fine if I open it in browser instead of Survey123 App.
Please confirm, if this is a regression & is there is any workaround to handle this.
Thank you,
Sachin Mali
Hi Sachin,
Can you please download the survey into Connect and then share a copy of the xlsx file so we can take a closer look?
Thanks,
Phil.