Latest Contributions by CraigWilliams

@wayfaringrob It's not an issue of changing the behavior - what you're asking for is fundamentally incompatible with how text is drawn and positioned in the map. I closed the issue to provide accurate feedback that we have no plans to change that behavior. As I stated my earlier response, alignment is relative to the geometry of the text baseline. The text type we do have that respects a envelope bounds is rectangle text (sometimes know as paragraph text) that can be created in graphics layers and layout. Alignment in that type respects the defined bounds. The issue @AlfredBaldenweck raises is separate and related to anchor points. I'm not able to reproduce that behavior on ArcGIS Pro 3.1 and that may be worth a support services call so we can look at the case in more detail. ... View more

Alignment changes the text relative to it's geometry which is typically a line or a point for annotation. The box is derived from those settings, not the opposite way around. ... View more

Those options aren't UI modes. They define the color type being authored and it will reflect the color type being edited. Since HSV is an alternative representation of the the RGB color model, some apps have UIs that show HSV selectors for colors they persist as RGB. We have an enhancement request to do this, but there are also still valid reasons for persisting just HSV values too so that will continue to be an option. ... View more

Yes the option for this is on the Point symbol callout and is named scale. Specifically you'd want the "Width and height" option: However you'll find it only grows the callout it doesn't shrink it. This is an oversight from how this worked in ArcMap and we'll look into satisfying your case. ... View more

For alignment, you need to use the <ALIGN> tag. See this topic for the supported list of tags and attributes. If you're setting it for all cases you can use stacking options to specify this too. As for the webmap case, text formatting tags are not supported in webmaps at this time. ... View more

We're actively working on this now and it's a near-term road map item. @BranislavBlagojevic - you mentioned another issue in this thread, do you have details on this? ... View more

The primary bottlenecks here are data access and file creation, two things a GPU won't help much with. We also need this process to work well on server class machines without GPUs, so we don't currenly have plans to pursue it. Parallelization of CPU based processing is a valid request, and that is already logged as ENH-000134796. ... View more

Datasets created in ArcGIS 2.x values are not broken. The values for dimension field integer values are the same between 10.x, ArcGIS Pro 2.x, and ArcGIS Pro 3.x dimensions. The CIM enum was incorrect in ArcGIS Pro 2.x though, so in ArcGIS Pro 2.x we converted between old and new integers when writing the field values into dimension feature classes. At ArcGIS 3.0, a breaking change release, we took the time to fix this discrepancy and matched the CIM enum integers to the persisted values. Unfortunately when we did this we missed a logic error in validation of input, which is why Out of Range is being reported. This Out of Range issue will be fixed in ArcGIS Pro 3.1 and we'll look to backport it to a 3.0 patch if possible. ... View more

Console() support was added at ArcGIS Pro 2.7. Additional support for script debugging is under consideration. ... View more

As stated in the other issue. We have no plans to do add this. You cannot delete items from the system styles and this would create an odd mixed experience where some items can be deleted and some cannot. If you really want only your own style items, unreferenced all the system styles and use only your own styles. ... View more