Latest Contributions by Zeke

Isn't it Historical <> 1? ... View more

Do you have any features where the value in the Situation field matches the values in your symbology?. Just guessing here; have you updated the Situation field so that it's values are 1 through 6. If you have a domain, your values have to match the code, not the description, for the domain, even though the description is what shows up in the attribute table. So if the actual value in a field is 'AREA DOADA', for example, instead of 1, it won't display in your symbology except as 'All other values'. If the Situation field is text and you're domain is numeric based, long integer for example, you'll need a long integer field for the domain. If your domain is text based, and 1, 2, 3, etc., are actually text and not numeric, you'd still need to set them to 1, 2, 3. See if that helps. ... View more

What exactly do you mean by 'status register'? Are you symbolizing by a field value? If so, which field and what value? If your field has all the same values, they'll all show the same. Sorry if this doesn't help, not clear on exactly what you're doing. ... View more

Translation to English via Google, in case that helps: Domain and Symbology      Personally I enter in my domain geodatabase. When I make a symbology to identify the blocks with status register, simply arcgis not paint my blocks. It generates symbology, but in view all the blocks are still the same. This occurred after inserting fields in my gdb.      How should I proceed? ... View more

Hmmm, maybe that's it. Thanks. [edit] that appears to account for some, but not all. Is there a way to make the radial lines visible without selecting individual parcels? ... View more

You can change the order symbols display in the legend using the up/down arrows on the symbology tab. I don't understand what the problem is with calculating the field before the join (couldn't you calculate it in the table first, using Excel or similar?), but in any case, once you've joined the table you can then export the whole thing to a new feature class and use that. FC will work on that. ... View more

Well, I guess I'll just recommend we keep both extensions. Not sure exactly what we'll be doing since we don't have the data yet. Thanks. ... View more

Have you checked or unchecked the 'Visible extent' checkbox in the Error Inspector window? I leave it unchecked myself. Also make sure you have 'Errors from all rules' selected, unless you just want to work on one type. Oh, and just to be sure, make sure the Errors checkbox is checked (duh!). ... View more

Apologize if you've done/know this, but couldn't tell from your post. First try using the Integrate tool. Set a tolerance you think is reasonable, say 0.5 feet, and vertices within the tolerance will snap together. That won't solve everything, but is a start. Not sure what you mean by Validate not doing anything. Assuming you've fixed an error, Validate doesn't 'do' anything visible except to remove the error symbology from corrected errors. When you check Error Inspector, you should have fewer errors (although once in a while a fix to one error may create another). I don't like running the automated fixes on large numbers of errors unless I can see a bunch of contiguous identical errors, such as a subdivision line cutting through a series of parcels. There are usually a small, but non-trivial number of errors that are better fixed manually. It can be tedious to go through them all, but yields better results. Don't know where the Asian characters would be coming from. ... View more

Not sure what you mean, could you explain the problem a bit more? ... View more

There's a very good video on migrating to the parcel fabric from the 2013 ESRI UC here. If you're in the Land Records Meetup group (go to Meetup.com, search for 'ESRI Land Records' or similar), there are also lots of recordings of previous meetings, including at least one good one on data migration. You have to join the group to view them, but it's ESRI sponsored and the folks who work on the fabric run it. Well worth it. There were some definite changes in the process from 10.0 to 10.1, but mainly in the addition of tools and workflows to make it easier. The biggest problem I've encountered is correcting topological errors in existing data, such as overlaps, to get it ready to migrate. Not hard to do, but there are a lot of errors, takes a while to get through. Helps to work on a few small sample sets for practice first. ... View more