Make web editor available to Mobile Workers

[RichardHowe]

I can't see the rationale behind making the web editor only available to Creators and higher. Anyone with a Creator licence already has access to ArcGIS Pro where they can edit their data with the full suite of desktop tools. The real beneficiaries of Web Editor will be Mobile Workers who have been out in the field and are potentially limited by Field Maps editing tools, and wish to tidy up their data when they are back in the office.

The Creator licence type is there for those who wish to create actual content i.e. hosted feature layers, webmaps, dashboards etc. not for those who simply wish to edit existing data.

Please reconsider the restrictive licencing of what, on the the face of it, seems like a really useful addition!

[BlakeMorrison]

Esri keep implementing features promised and requested for ExB into Web Editor, which as discussed in this thread, everyone is confused about who is the target user audience. I get the feeling that Esri are going to turn around any second and say that they no longer plan to provide WAB -> ExB parity.

[Scott_Sambell]

So who is WebEditor intended for?  If you are a creator, you have access to Pro (which is not something you can even opt out of now!) Mobile workers need a desktop editor to enter data when they are in the office, on their computers.  WebEditor was the perfect solution. It was Field Maps in a browser. They loved it.  Now the only people that we know of that actually had a use for it can't access it anymore.  I can't think of one case where someone with an ArcPro licence would use WebEditor, but literally thousands of cases of everyday data editors who have been crying out for this tool. And then it got taken away from them.

The people at Esri who made this decision have obviously never met a Field Worker.

[LarryYoung]

@Scott_Sambell thanks for the feedback.  We are continuing to evaluate the licensing requirements for Web Editor, and will keep your comments in mind as we move forward.

Thanks, larry

[BlakeMorrison]

@LarryYoung, Scott actually had a question. I'm interested in the answer too.

Who is WebEditor intended for?

[LarryYoung]

Web Editor (WE) Is meant to be an easy to use editor for the web.  The functionality of WE will ultimately get close to the capabilities for editing in Pro, though we are not trying to replace it in that respect.

As such, WE is intended for subject matter experts all the way up to GIS professionals depending on the workflows they need to accomplish.

Map Viewer and Experience Builder are also viable editing alternatives on the web for simple editing workflows.  As mentioned, we continue to monitor the feedback on workflows users want to accomplish and how that fits into the user type model.

Thanks for the feedback.

[AnthonyJonesRSK]

Hi @LarryYoung, I saw in the latest AGOL update the new web editor instant apps template, which allows the creator to modify the web editor app including the tools available to the user. Unfortunately it appears that this template is also locked behind the creator licence. Is there potential for this template to become available to contributor and mobile worker licences in the future when certain tools are disabled? I assume the issue is that you are currently offering editing tools that you consider to be too"premium" for users below a creator licence. My question is whether there has been any consideration for a "Lite" version of web editor with some of these tools removed that allows a user to open any web map available to them to edit the data as needed? Or is there potential to lock users without the required licence out of particular tools rather than just the whole app? I think some flexibility on access would be much appreciated. Thanks

[RichardHowe]

Seems to me there is a slow slide towards sneakily altering the meaning of "creator" from creating maps and apps to creating data. Mobile workers and contributors NEED better tools to be able to adequately create and amend data within maps and ESRI seem intent on hiding things that have been lacking for years behind a paywall.

[LarryYoung]

Hi @AnthonyJonesRSK,

Yes, configuring Web Editor through Instant Apps is in beta with the latest Online release.  We have had many discussions on whether configurations should be available at a lower user type level.  One point that keeps coming up is the fact that somebody could create a configuration with the whole app.

Before we released Web Editor or the Advanced Editing UTE we looked into licensing based on specific editing capabilities, but is a very slippery slope and something that would be even harder to explain than our current licensing structure.

As mentioned previously, we continue to monitor and rethink our licensing structure and user responses in hopes of finding something that works for everyone.  Web Editor is an app solely for editing, so has some advantages over Map Viewer or Experience Builder for users that spend a significant portion of their day editing.  As always we provide the user community options (maybe too many), so simple workflows for casual editors can be accomplished in apps other than Web Editor with a lower user type as an alternative.

thanks, larry

[StefanUseldinger]

A quick side note: Batch attribute editing is now also available in the standard map viewer. I assume for all user types with editing permissions.
https://www.esri.com/arcgis-blog/products/arcgis-online/mapping/whats-new-in-map-viewer-june-2025#ed...

[AnthonyJonesRSK]

Hi @LarryYoung, thanks for the response. I think the frustration again is that you make the point "Web Editor is an app solely for editing" yet a large proportion of your customers who have editing permissions cannot us an app solely for editing. I understand what you're saying on the complexity of the licencing structure and potentially making that more complicated but is there not potential to have the app grey out tools that are unavailable to users with lower licence levels? If they try to use a more advanced editing tool the app says that this is unavailable under their current licence?

The community is saying that we would like the option for our contributors and mobile workers to be able to use this app and you have said a few times that you monitor the community responses but it seems like this is something the team isn't going to budge on. I think it would be preferable if Esri just came out and said no, this is an app for creators as it's been out for over a year now. It's a shame as we have a large user base of mobile workers that could really make use of the app and whilst there are alternatives they don't offer the convenience that this does.

Thanks

Anthony