Latest Contributions by RPGIS

That actually makes it the easiest since the latest version of Enterprise actually allows for better control using attribute rules. So to get to the rules themselves: You can either right click on the table/feature in the catalog and select Data Design or similar to the image below From there you can click on the attribute rules Click on the constraint tab and you can then add your rule.

Hi @CodyPatterson, It is possible to do so. The way to go about it is to add a constraint rule on the attachment table itself to look for the globalid of the related feature record and then set the insert trigger to have it look to see if the required attributes have been filled out.

Hi @Steve_Walker, If your using a referenced feature service and you want to publish the new changes then you won't lose any of the information. If it is hosted, then what you will need to do is copy/modify the collected data into the pre-existing local feature class, modify the domains/fields/etc. and then republish as to overwrite the data in AGO.

Hi @Ammarali, Just to clarify, are you asking as part of an idea from Esri or something else. If it is an idea then this can be moved to the ideas page. Also, if it is an idea, then please provide any supportive reasons so there is a stronger likelihood that if it can be implemented for multiple people then it can be made as part of an update.

I am not sure because we use attribute rules to dictate a lot of the editing behavior. It may automatically populate but I cannot be certain of that. In any case you may want to consider using an attribute rule just to be on the safe side.

Hi @aam, So to answer your questions: Yes, you can append data to the related table using information from the parent table. We have attribute rules that do this automatically for our inspections. You can use any kind of id but you must make certain that the field data types are the same and the primary key fields in both tables are of similar size. So yes you can use GlobalIDs. Just make sure the related table has a separate globalid field that isn't auto-populated. Yes - Must be a global id When you append and you field match accordingly it will match automatically. You do not want the related table to populate automatically because your relationship will not work. The relationship is looking for identical values so if they are different then it will not work.

Hi @yockee, I don't typically use validation rules simply because the workflows that we have generally will account for all the edits that come in from the field. Typically validation is mostly for verifying that the data that is entered meets a certain criteria. It is usually best to create calculations that will account for certain things rather than try and force the editor to fill in the information. The solutions that we have created automatically account for certain behaviors and so there isn't a need to for validation. The other thing is if you are concerned with certain types of edits then you could try and create a constraint rule instead. The benefit of a constraint rule is that you can customize messages will appear to the editors and letting them know what needs to be corrected in order to continue editing.

There is but it may require some knowledge of either arcade or python in order to find unsnapped points. The other thing to try is to set a location filter for all the points and finding the nearest line where the distance is greater than 0.

Hi @Jennifer_Parmeley, To Clarify, just so others can get a better understanding of what you mean, do you mean to add the ability to freeze fields so users can still see the fields as they scroll. The other slight workaround is to zoom out of the webpage but that will result in the text shrinking throughout. I think the ability to freeze fields/column headers would be a more straightforward improvement.

So there might be a few things that can be tested. Create a hosted view that is updated in field maps but has a filter set in the map to only display certain values. This should restrict the editing of the related record You can simply filter out the table values so that they are only visible in Survey123 but not in field maps Append a value to the related table such as a text field with attributes stating "survey" and have it so that it does not display in field maps when you set the visibility fields to look for fields that don't have that value.

The only thing I can think of is to create an expression that concatenates and modifies the html at the same time. Something like: var C = ['• SomeValue','• SomeValue','• SomeValue'] return Concatenate(C,'/n') in addition to the html element. Something that may be doable but I have yet to test this fully.

So that is a fairly simple and straightforward method but it does have a strange workaround. Basically you would simply need to set a pre filtered field to only show the actively edited features. If you need further guidance in pretty sure others in the community have also handled this as well.

Hi @mshanaghan, You can do it but I believe there is a slight configuration issue between an editable enterprise fs vs a hosted service. The problem mainly stems from the configuration of the service itself which might prevent it from being updated. Here is the documentation pertaining to that. Feature layer requirements—ArcGIS Survey123 | Documentation There are two other things to consider depending on which direction you want to take. Regarding enterprise feature services, it is typically ideal to use Field Maps since the underlying application code base is more compatible with those types of services when compared to Survey123. Survey123 on the other hand has more capabilities and intricacies than field maps, allowing users to customize the applications behavior extensively, which most people would understand by now. However, one thing to consider at least in regard to enterprise feature services, is the use of attribute rules in conjunction with SQL to automate a majority of workflows. That is how we have our inspections set up which has reduced the time it takes to fill out information while automating a lot of our reports.

Hi @SanchezNuñez, Then you could try to deconstruct the network temporarily, though that might be inadvisable, make the change and then rebuild it. I have not constructed a utility network myself but if that is a known issue then that might be the only option. Here is something I found akin to your situation. Editing the Utility Network Schema for an Existing... - Esri Community

Have you tried creating a replica schema to see if that will work? I have not used those myself but based on what I have read it will create a local copy of the exact features you need. Whether or not that will work for you is unknown but you could give that a try.

Online Status	Online
Date Last Visited	4 hours ago

My Ideas

Latest Contributions by RPGIS

Re: Detect When Attachment is Added - Field Maps Tasks

Re: Detect When Attachment is Added - Field Maps Tasks

Re: Changes to contingent values

Re: Rule

Re: Building a Relationship Class

Re: Building a Relationship Class

Re: Attribute Validation / Calculation using Arcade or Database Trigger

Re: Finding unsnapped features

Re: Improve Output Window in Dashboard Data Expression Area

Re: Restrict editing to related record only; not allow adding new features to parent layer?

Re: Spacing Between Popup Elements

Re: Asset Inventory in Survey 123

Re: Asset Inventory in Survey 123

Re: How to Update a Coded Value Description in a Domain Associated with an AssetType

Re: Get .SDE Schema with Utility Network to File Geodatabase

Re: Finding unsnapped features

Re: Building a Relationship Class

Re: Spacing Between Popup Elements

Re: Asset Inventory in Survey 123

Re: Asset Inventory in Survey 123

ArcGIS Arcade