|
POST
|
Hi, You should be able to use the Error Inspector to view both Topology rule and validation attribute rule errors (although the Error Inspector may default to displaying Topology rule errors). To view attribute rule errors, you will need to ensure that you have added the error layers to the map. From the Error Inspector, select the Error Layers item from the Source drop-down menu. Here is a doc topic that walks through this process.
... View more
04-02-2024
12:32 PM
|
0
|
1
|
1301
|
|
POST
|
Hi, Can you share some additional details on the workflow/environment that you configured your Evaluate Polygon Perimeter and Area check? Was the validation attribute rule created manually from the Ready to Use Rules gallery or exported/imported from a Reviewer Batch Job file. The geodatabase type and the spatial reference of input dataset This would be helpful in troubleshooting Thanks!
... View more
03-19-2024
01:38 PM
|
0
|
0
|
1010
|
|
POST
|
Thanks-much for sharing the details of your configuration! There appears to be an issue during evaluation when a dataset contains multiple Query Attributes-based rules and one of those rules contains an Attribute Filter. The development team has been able to reproduce this behavior and have logged a bug to address the issue. Thanks again for the heads-up!
... View more
03-07-2024
02:26 PM
|
0
|
0
|
1262
|
|
POST
|
Hi, Can you share some additional details on how you have configured your Query Attributes checks? For example, the type of geodatabase used, filters (Subtype, Attribute) and Search Goal configuration would be helpful in troubleshooting. Thanks!
... View more
03-05-2024
03:47 PM
|
0
|
1
|
1276
|
|
IDEA
|
@cordtsraThanks for the clarification. The Table to Table Attribute check requires that the data source referenced by the Features/Rows to Compare parameter must include a global ID field. Can you confirm that your table include a global ID?
... View more
02-26-2024
10:45 AM
|
0
|
0
|
1002
|
|
IDEA
|
@cordtsra wrote: I am currently working on converting RBJs to Attribute Rules. One issue I noticed is that I can't run a standalone check, or a composite check with a non-spatial table. I can create attribute rules for the non-spatial table, but there is no way to run those rules as you cannot add error layers for that table. Also, if I want to reference the non-spatial table in another feature class's attribute rules it doesn't appear in the drop down. For clarification, which Data Reviewer check(s) are you trying to use with your table?
... View more
02-26-2024
08:43 AM
|
0
|
0
|
1018
|
|
POST
|
Not Arcade, but Data Reviewer's Feature on Feature check can be used to implement a validation attribute rule which identifies the above scenario (spatial relationship: intersects, Compare Attributes: Network Level ≠ Network Level). Unfortunately, the same check used as a constraint attribute rule lacks the ability to compare attributes of features that intersect.
... View more
02-23-2024
02:34 PM
|
1
|
0
|
530
|
|
POST
|
How about deleting the attribute rules in the exported feature/object classes (followed by deleting the error layers)? Delete Attribute Rule (Data Management)
... View more
11-16-2023
09:33 AM
|
0
|
0
|
1690
|
|
POST
|
Not Arcade, but Data Reviewer's Regular Expression check can be used to create a validation attribute rule that identifies text values that don't match email/telephone formatting. There are lots of great regular expression examples on the web supporting common formatting. Here is one source.
... View more
11-13-2023
09:00 AM
|
0
|
0
|
740
|
|
POST
|
I'd suggest reviewing the configuration of the Find Dangles and Orphan checks (using ArcMap) to determine if the optional Include additional features in comparison parameter is being used. Including additional data sources when identifying features with dangles will impact performance.
... View more
11-03-2023
01:22 PM
|
0
|
0
|
1924
|
|
POST
|
You might want to start your investigation by identifying those rules in the Reviewer Batch Job that are taking the most time to complete. Reviewing the contents of the log file that is created when running the Execute Reviewer Batch Job geoprocessing tool is a good place to start. The file is stored in the %localappdata%\Esri\DataReviewer folder and will contain summary messages of the rules run when using the tool. On a related note, this tool was directly migrated from ArcMap to ArcGIS Pro. It is provided to enable users in a mixed desktop environment (ArcMap and ArcGIS Pro) to work together. I would suggest evaluating Data Reviewer's "native" data validation capabilities for those organizations who are migrating to ArcGIS Pro.
... View more
10-31-2023
08:59 AM
|
1
|
2
|
1945
|
|
POST
|
As @PaulinaKarkauskaite pointed-out, some of the basic tools used in visual QC review are already available in ArcGIS Pro and there are additional tools planned for future releases. That said, I'd be interested in getting feedback on QC requirements your customer envisions needing after their migration to ArcGIS Pro. This input would help the team ensure that Pro-based workflows reflect current needs of data production workflows and improve over those created in the past. Feel free to send me a message if you'd like to schedule a meet-up!
... View more
09-14-2023
03:25 PM
|
0
|
0
|
1614
|
|
POST
|
You might want to investigate the use of an input filter on this check. Filters can be applied to the Find Dangles check to only evaluate those features within a specific geodatabase subtype (Subtype parameter) and/or features that match a SQL WHERE clause (Attribute parameter).
... View more
09-08-2023
04:43 PM
|
0
|
0
|
2501
|
|
POST
|
There are a couple of options available in ArcGIS Pro that support a similar workflow as ArcMap's Commit To Reviewer Table tool. The Browse Features tool supports the interactive review of a selection of features and creation of error results for those features that fail review. Alternatively, the Write to Reviewer Table geoprocessing tool supports the creation of error features based on an input feature layer.
... View more
08-29-2023
12:12 PM
|
0
|
1
|
1243
|
|
POST
|
Does this help? The Data Reviewer based tools (DR itself and "Missing Features" and "Browse Features" of Manage Data Quality) use only the DR schema and that evaluate data quality step (from error inspector or the work flow manager step) only the error layers. For clarification, the following tools in ArcGIS Pro support the Reviewer Workspace: Flag Missing Features Browse Features GP tools (Execute Reviewer Batch Job, Write To Reviewer Table, Create Reviewer Session, Delete Reviewer Session, Enable Data Reviewer) Can you have both the DR schema and error layers in the same database? Is this possible with a Branch Versioned gdb? In enterprise? In file/mobile geodatabase, the Reviewer Workspace and attribute rule (AR) error layers should co-exist peacefully. Note: Implementing attribute rules will impact backward compatibility with ArcMap and older versions of ArcGIS Pro. More info can be found here. Reviewer Workspace is not supported in branch versioned enterprise geodatabase and AR error layers are not supported in traditional versioned enterprise geodatabase. In Pro, Data Reviewer requires the setting up a workspace on the database == a schema with tables for track errors e.g. Enable Data Reviewer. I assume the resulting schema tables are just like the tables set-up with Data Reviewer with ArcMap. A Reviewer Workspace created in ArcGIS Pro is compatible with ArcMap 10.8x. To use the Data Quality "Missing Features" and Browse Features tools you need the Data Reviewer license. My understanding is that any errors generated by these 2 tools are written only to the DR schema tables. Correct What are called "Data Reviewer Checks" are equivalent to the "ready to use rules" that show up in the "Attribute Rules tab"? Data Reviewer's checks (documented here) can be configured to implement constraint and validation attribute rules. They are access from the "Ready to Use Rules" gallery in Attribute rules view as outlined here. Can Data Reviewer run standard attribute rules (written in Arcade) rather than the Reviewer checks? If so where are the errors written; DR schema, or the error layers? In validation attribute rules, there are two implementation patterns (Arcade and Data Reviewer). Regardless of the implementation, rules are evaluated together with resultant error features created in the AR error layers. Note: To evaluate Data Reviewer-based validation attribute rules a Data Reviewer for ArcGIS Pro (file/mobile geodatabase) or a Data Reviewer for ArcGIS Enterprise license (branch versioned enterprise geodatabase) is required. From the Error Inspector running the evaluate data quality command the output for either a ready to use rule or a standard arcade validation rule are written to the error layers. They have different life cycle behavior. This is as-designed. Is there a way to import/export they error layers into the DR schema or visa versa? Importing AR error features to a Reviewer Workspace should be possible using the Write to Reviewer Table GP tool. Custom code will be required to translate an AR error feature's FeatureClassID value to the corresponding Feature/object class name. Importing Reviewer Workspace error features to AR error layers is not supported since these tables are system-managed to maintain consistency between rules and their error features.
... View more
07-20-2023
04:01 PM
|
0
|
1
|
2008
|
| Title | Kudos | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 08-05-2025 10:53 AM | |
| 1 | 07-10-2025 05:23 PM | |
| 1 | 07-10-2025 10:43 AM | |
| 1 | 10-15-2024 04:47 PM | |
| 1 | 08-30-2024 09:26 AM |
| Online Status |
Offline
|
| Date Last Visited |
2 weeks ago
|