Latest Contributions by DrewFlater

@Bud databases like SQL Server, Oracle, others will be random when there is no SORTBY provided. Sometimes it might be one record then change to another tomorrow.  ... View more

@Bud thanks for your comments. For enterprise database sources there currently isn't a mechanism to match to the lowest ObjectID, we're in discussion with the enterprise geodatabase team for ideas how to resolve this.  The one-to-many option is only available if the input and join tables are in the same database, since the joining happens at the database level.  ... View more

This was more of a defect, so I am closing it as such. Pro 3.5 has improved parsing of Python scripts for swizzling data path strings. The f string pattern shown above will no longer raise an error. The folder variable will be updated by the consolidation swizzling, and the full contents of the c:\temp directory would be uploaded to the server during publishing of the web tool.  ... View more

Support for ExtendedData attributes in KML is being added to the ArcGIS Runtime KML parser that is in use across Esri products. KML To Layer is being actively worked on for the last several months to support this parser. We are hoping this will be complete in the near term, perhaps the ArcGIS Pro 3.5 release.  ... View more

The tool command messages inside the model tool are not on by default in Pro, since it can make a model tool that runs many tools have an extremely long message collection. You can turn these messages back on using the Command Syntax additional message option under Geoprocessing Options.              ... View more

This option is already available since the Pro 1.x series. Many users prefer the behavior you describe, and others want the opposite behavior, so we needed to develop an option to suit either case. This and the other Geoprocessing Options are set at the application level so apply to all your projects that you work with on that machine. Most of these options you can set once to your preference then forget about them 🙂 https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/help/analysis/geoprocessing/basics/geoprocessing-options.htm#ESRI_SECTION1_E587F6B438FC489BA15AD4A41F090733   ... View more

Just an update that in ArcGIS Pro 3.4, geoprocessing tools have been integrated with the Pro notification system. This doc link will work when 3.4 is released: https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/help/projects/arcgis-pro-notifications.htm#ESRI_SECTION1_DDA2A8047D4141E3BE1CB87532DB3768 As part of the overall notification system, geoprocessing notifications will benefit as enhancements to that system are made. There is a plan to support notification sounds in a future release. I'm changing the label of this Idea to align with how notification enhancements are tracked. ... View more

@Bud we have been working on an append capability that may land in the Pro 3.5 release. It accomplishes the same thing as this idea but in the reverse way. You still won't be able to Append and select X and Y fields to construct a shape field for loading into an existing point feature class. Although that might align with this: https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-pro-ideas/enhance-append-tool-to-allow-python-arcade/idi-p/1195885?search-action-id=138591074237&search-result-uid=1195885 The new append capability will put an option into tools like XY Table To Point, so instead of creating a new output feature class, you can load the new points into an existing point feature class. This append option will be present on a number of feature processing tools.  ... View more

@JoshuaBixby your idea has been merged here. Your diagram is really nice!  Can you explain what process requires the multiple rows or why you want to "explode" the concatenated values to multiple rows? Your diagram and the previous explanation are very clear about what the request is, and the arcgis-pro-question at the top has a code sample to accomplish this.  A subtle difference in the original request seems to be exploding multiple fields. I don't know if the matching of the items between two or more fields is expected to me at least -- PRJTID=2 turns into two records based on positional matching, rather than exploding to rows with all possible combinations.  ... View more

@BrookeAumann hmm it seems the underlying function arcpy.GetImageEXIFProperties does not work with your provided JPG. You can try this step for debugging, or email me the file at [email protected].  Run this short script in the Python window file = r"\\Photos 2\IMG_0051.JPG" #or whatever your path to your JPG exifProps = arcpy.GetImageEXIFProperties(file)   If GetImageEXIFProperties cannot succeed, that means there is something problematic with the file or the code. It would be a BUG which you can contact Esri Support about the problem, or if you provide me the file I can make an internal development issue. ... View more

@RichardHowe our internal development issue is still open for this enhancement idea, it is currently in our Pro 3.5 plan though plans are subject to change. I just retested with KMZ that another user had provided, and the image files were not carried forward into the geodatabase or output layer after running KML To Layer.  ... View more

This is implemented in ArcGIS Pro 3.4 as a new Mode statistic, which calculates the most commonly-occurring value.      ... View more

The Largest Overlap option was added to Spatial Join only, as Spatial Join does a one by one operation for each target feature, where each target feature is examined to determine if any join features have a spatial relationship with that target feature. If many join features have the spatial relationship with the one target feature, Largest Overlap joins the join feature that has the largest overlap to the target feature.  Thinking about Select Layer By Location is different. Any input feature gets selected if it has the spatial relationship with any selecting feature. There is no handling about what if an input feature overlaps multiple selecting features, or if multiple input features overlap the same selecting feature. Imagine this case, where a green feature overlaps a big orange feature (id=1) and a small orange feature (id=2).   If the green feature is the input and the orange features are the selecting feature, a Largest Overlap relationship doesn't make sense - the green feature is going to get selected because it overlaps any orange features. If the orange features are the input features and the green feature is the selecting feature, first orange 1 is evaluated for a spatial relationship with green (it overlaps) then orange 2 is evaluate for a spatial relationship with green (it overlaps) -- so both orange would get selected. There isn't a mode of select layer by location that would unselect orange 2 because orange 1 has a larger overlap with a single green feature.  If you can graphically describe what your expectation is between two feature layers and how a selection could be performed based on a Largest Overlap relationship, please share the details to get this issue reopened for votes/consideration. ... View more