Select to view content in your preferred language

Wetland Determination Survey 123 form

31144
42
11-28-2018 01:38 PM
ClaireInbody1
Frequent Contributor

Has any DOTs implemented Collector/Survey 123 for their wetland delineations and wetland determination forms? Nebraska DOT has a pilot project under way to convert the wetland determination form into Survey 123 application. We have almost completed it but having a few issues regarding dominance test for vegetation along with a few issues regarding the report template. We are willing to share our insights so far and interested to see what other DOTs are doing. 

42 Replies
KamMuri
Emerging Contributor

Thanks for sharing this, Byron! I haven’t done any testing in the field yet but it’s worked great so far in desktop testing. A while back in this thread (2019 I think) you had posted about wanting to re-implement a version of the form design using repeats with the possibility of using javascript - did you ever give that a go? Just curious what the main road blocks/issues were if you did try using repeats but ultimately decided against it. The version you’ve shared is great and on top of that pretty amazing that the feature report comes out so cleanly. Just interested in your experience of using repeats as we seem to face this issue a lot of preferring to use repeats from a data structure standpoint but find that has it’s own tradeoffs. 

ByronTsang
Occasional Contributor

Sure thing, Kam. Unpacking your questions a bit:

The drive to deploy repeats and js was an attempt to avoid performance problems associated with large choice lists for plant species.  In the earliest versions of this form, I was limited to only a few hundred of the most common species due to memory demands on older devices, stemming from all the duplicate select_one plant lookup questions.  My work-around was to do pre-field prep to have location-specific version of this survey with only the most abundantly observed species.  everything else would be flagged as "other" and then I would supplement species lists as-needed during post-fieldwork data cleanup.  It was ugly but functional.

Unfortunately, I was never able to make the repeats work.  In particular the 50/20 dominance test and the report template export didn't play well with repeats.  I fiddled with indexed repeats when those came out but in the end it wasn't worth the effort to overhaul.

Once we had the ability to use select_one_from_file questions, this problem went away, as the form was able to handle large 3-5k species lists despite the duplicate questions.  The form still takes several seconds to load, but it's a reasonable delay, so I haven't been motivated to revisit the repeats issue. At this point I have one instance of the form for each of the USACE regional supplements, which meets out needs perfectly.

KamMuri
Emerging Contributor

Thanks, Byron. Makes sense. Will be fiddling with repeats and likely using javascript quite a bit when necessary but agree it brings complexity that's better to avoid if you can.