Polygons under polygons of same layer

[DarrenPlatakis]

Hello everyone,

I have recently switched to 10.0 and have stumbled upon a problem that I need to deal with.

I georeference land parcels that represent development applications or other land use amendments.

In 9.3.1 I could have a large area made up of multiple parcels representing an Official Plan for example and I could also have a specific parcel representing a different Official Plan. (two separate polygons)

However, in 10.0 when I attempt the same thing, the smaller parcel appears to be automatically "absorbed" into the larger parcel rather than being created and considered its own polygon within the larger area.

I believe there may be some type of default rule occuring (that I'm not familiar with). Is there something I need to "turn off" in order to be able to do this? 

Your help is much appreciated.

Cheers!

Darren

[JoshuaDamron]

In 9.3.1 I could have a large area made up of multiple parcels representing an Official Plan for example and I could also have a specific parcel representing a different Official Plan. (two separate polygons)

However, in 10.0 when I attempt the same thing, the smaller parcel appears to be automatically "absorbed" into the larger parcel rather than being created and considered its own polygon within the larger area.

Darren,
  Are you still experiencing this issue?

I work with similar data and have similar maps where I am mapping overlapping recorded maps.  I have not encountered the issue you described.  Could you clarify what you mean by absorbing? 

Does absorbed mean that the features are being merged into one feature (no longer two unique features)?  Or do you mean that when printing/viewing the data the symbology between the two features is not unique?  Or one feature is hidden by another features overlapping symbology?

Post back with some more info and we'll help you resolve your issue.

[DarrenPlatakis]

Darren,
  Are you still experiencing this issue?

I work with similar data and have similar maps where I am mapping overlapping recorded maps.  I have not encountered the issue you described.  Could you clarify what you mean by absorbing? 

Does absorbed mean that the features are being merged into one feature (no longer two unique features)?  Or do you mean that when printing/viewing the data the symbology between the two features is not unique?  Or one feature is hidden by another features overlapping symbology?

Post back with some more info and we'll help you resolve your issue.

Hi,

No, the issue has been resolved. I chalk it up to the unfamiliarity with how editing is done in 10.0. Thanks for the contact though.

Cheers,

Darren