Trouble with Cascading selects

[JamieUrquhart]

Hi folks

Any help would be appreciated here. I've used survey 123 for a couple of years but only really used the templates and tweaked them a little for my own purposes. After setting these up a few years back I'd like to refine them now that survey 123 has advanced and the surveys have too.

One survey I would like to develop is a field survey for plants across several catchments. I'd like to eliminate any errors by having selections provide the correct fields on offer during the site selection process.

I started to use a template to create a cascading select to pre-select a survey site list based on catchment and partner lists. However I cannot seem to get it to work. I've tried to use the cascading selects example using a Regex style but with no luck. See link and attached attempt

https://doc.arcgis.com/en/survey123/desktop/create-surveys/xlsformcascadingselects.htm 

I've not used survey 123 all that recently and am a bit rusty, any pointers would be greatly appreciated.

Best regards Jamie

[Jim-Moore · Accepted solution]

Hi @JamieUrquhart the cascading selects are almost there. Please see an example attached, which demonstrates cascading selects for the catchment and site_ID questions. Note that the syntax used here is column_name=value, where column_name is the column header on the choices sheet (e.g. 'partner') that contains the values for the filter, and value is the value to filter on (e.g. ${partner}).

I wasn't sure about the local_name question, but it appears this is a 1:1 relationship with catchment_name, in which case you could just add the corresponding catchment name to the catchment column for this choice list and then use the catchment=${catchment} expression in the choice filter column.

In addition to the Connect sample, there's lots of great info and examples in this blog post which could be useful.

Hope this helps! Best, Jim

[JamieUrquhart]

Dear Jim

Thank you for resolving this issue for me, I'll be sure to look though the blog which seems to be exactly what I was after.

Yes the correction for local_name was just as you suggested.  Many thanks for your prompt response with this query.

Best regards Jamie