Latest Contributions by CraigWilliams

Closing as we have no plans to implement this and 512 tiles can be used with 256 tiles as mentioned above. ... View more

ArcMap's label styles stored both the placement and the text symbol. We found that there weren't heavily used because many wanted the placement but not the specific text symbol - so we separated them to allow for more free mixing and matching. ... View more

We have updated the display field logic at ArcGIS Pro 3.5 to avoid the Shape_Length and Shape_Area fields. In the specific case of a polyline or polygon feature class with no additional fields, you'll now have the OBJECTID field as the display field. We are not defaulting to it for cases where other fields are present as there is usually a better choice that OBJECTID which is essentially an implementation detail. So, the logic looks for fields with the word "name" in English or the localized language and then walking through other non-OBJECTID field names in the order of string fields, date fields, numeric fields, and then finally OBJECTID is the last resort. ... View more

That issue ended up being converted to an enhancement ENH-000172553 which was then closed with the public explanation: "This is the expected behavior. Fields cannot be permanently reordered at the database level. https://support.esri.com/en-us/knowledge-base/how-to-permanently-reorder-fields-in-a-feature-class-us-000025984" Is something being lost in the communication here? If the desire is to save the field re-order, you can use a layer file for layer level re-ordering without altering schema.     ... View more

The Generate Contiguous Cartogram tool was added at ArcGIS Pro 3.5. There are a few other requests in this idea about non-contiguous and Dorling cartograms. We are collecting requirements on these. See also this blog post Ken Field and Chris Wesson about the addition: https://www.esri.com/arcgis-blog/products/arcgis-pro/mapping/marmite-maps-now-available-in-arcgis-pro ... View more

Labeling respect the map frame edge in all cases except when it's told not to. Settings that tell it not to  include: Label class level property: Never remove (place overlapping) The map level property: Allow labels to overlap border There is zero buffer applied to the boundary, so labels may be right against it if they fit. It's a bit hard to tell in your images, but some examples may be that. As for the overlap case, it's hard to determine what is going on there, but perhaps Never remove is enabled. ... View more

I'm marking this implemented but it's a bit different than the approach being used here. The shape field of an annotation object is just the bounds of the item. Changing it does not affect the annotation in the way you're expecting. At ArcGIS Pro 3.4 we introduced a new ANNO@ token to work with an Annotation object in cursors and modify properties using the arcpy CIM access. Use that path to make modifications you want to make. ... View more

We implemented an approach for annotation in arcpy.da cursors in ArcGIS Pro 3.4 that uses an Annotation object tied with arcpy CIM access to fully expose the annotation feature content. See https://pro.arcgis.com/en/pro-app/latest/arcpy/classes/annotation.htm for more details. ... View more

The ArcGIS Pro UI takes the decimal value. 63113 is the decimal value of the hexadecimal f689. ... View more

Remove duplicates does work across label classes and layers but it's limited to prevent accidental removals. Currently only labels from the same feature type (point, line, polygon etc.) and in label classes with the same font and size will be considered duplicates as documented here. You're requesting unlimited removal for any matching text string? ... View more