Latest Contributions by JimBarry

Not sure the forum needs another "general" topic, but then again...:rolleyes: The idea as proposed was to have a place where big picture topics about GIS could be discussed.  That is, GIS regardless of product or technology.   Questions about professional development, GIS science, education, career paths, etc., anything other than actually using products, modules, functions, etc. I don't know.  It sounded like a viable idea and didn't interfere or overlap with anything else going on out here.   I don't expect that it will be too heavily used, and in the thread I recommended perhaps better places to have those kinds of conversations than in an ArcGIS-based set of forums, but we'll see. Not sure I'd get too hung up on the use of the word "general" there.  😉 ... View more

a.  Seems there are only a few in the Yes column who have two or less total posts on the forums over the past year.  Not sure if we should consider those an honest informed vote.   But even without them, it still stands as a strong yes but with low voter turnout.   b.  I'm not sure who deleted those posts below. (I can see the posts thru my admin tools. It seems it was deleted by the posters themselves, so I won't comment on the content of those particular posts.) c.  Votes from Esri staff should not weigh nearly as much as from someone outside Esri.  Just my opinion I intend to use.  But then the decision to split the extensions forums was due it to being heavily and almost unanimously requested by both the user community and Esri staff. d.  Despite it being a heavy yes, I still do share Dan's point about de facto abstained votes.  Meaning, there are far more users who didn't vote.  Will those folks become actively complaining "we don't like the split Python forum" after we split it?  Or do many of them simply don't care one way or the other and will use the forums either way?   We'll simply need to make a decision without being able to know. e.  I'm going to give this thread one more week (11/19), then I plan on making a decision that I guarantee will make quite a number of people happy, and quite a number of other people unhappy (perhaps unhappy enough to give up and stop using the forums.  I'd like to try to prevent that, but I cannot control it.)   Here's a hint:  If the yes continues to strengthen (with real users), then we'll create a Python forum, but if the strongest opinions either way are limited to just a very small (albeit vocal) set of users, then my tendency without a strong case is to leave it alone. f.  As for "General" forums being bad, I hear your arguments and there are some good logical points there.  But at the same time:      -    1.  There should be a place for a catch-all for topics that are outside the more defined topics.      -    2.  There should be a place for discussion of topics that are more general and cut across several specific topics.  Not every question or topic of discussion is that fine grained specific.      -    3.  There are always a set of users on the forums who are new to the technology.  They may not know what to do, how, or why enough to choose the best specific forum, or they don't know the terms well enough.  It's important to remember that the forums need to try to help the most folks it can, not just those who've been in the game long enough to have forgotten what it's like to not know what to do, how to do it, or where to turn.   (Maybe the answer here can include more active moderation by Esri staff and selected power-users from the community, moving threads and such.   Are there folks out there who wouldn't mind having Mod permissions to better assist these folks?)      -    4.  If anyone contends that there are some posts in there because the OP was too lazy to put it in a better forum, and because of that the right users aren't going to be there to answer it, then... ok... it won't get answered.   I have to rely on users who take the time to ask a question taking the time to try to put it into the right place.   But this is what I've been saying all along about a *fewer* number of more *general* forums.  If we go back to making hundreds of very specific forums, that will make it unreasonable for many users to know where to put it, creating more misposting and more inappropriate use of "general" forums. ... View more

Great to see this much input.   Thanks all.   A few comments and answers I can throw in that might help. >...very complex spider that was constantly crawling the forums tagging things One the one hand, I see how a crawler that was good at auto-tagging posts would be great.  But as a practical matter I'd weigh the benefits against the costs of building and maintaining the rules, and manually cleaning up after the exceptions and mistaggings.   On the other hand, even if well-implemented how much really would such a system improve search results more than the vBulletin indexing and search tool already in place? Example:   If we kept the big bucket "All Extensions" forum, I'd  feel pretty confident setting loose an auto-tagger on that.   Most  extensions are pretty discrete, do things that no other extension does,  have terms that mostly belong to it and no other.  I have no such  confidence that an auto-tagger would be as successful on the whole of  ArcGIS when it comes to the different dimensions of workflows,  functions, users, developers, industry application, solutions, etc. > Jim already said he wouldn't (or at least be reluctant) to institute an forum crawler auto-tagger. I'll admit to you all.  There are plenty of ideas that on the quick face of it seem good, but then we don't implement after weighing the cost-benefit of the idea, and weighing the improvement against what other things are broken in the process.   I hope that answers the simple question of "If autotagging would be good, why don't you just do it?".  I could come up with probably dozens of terms we use in GIS that mean different things in different contexts.  If our categorical buckets had a nice clean set of discrete terms with little vagueness or overlap, sure.  I guess for the moment we're stuck on the thought of "will it make things so much better versus the cost?" or "might it actually make things worse?" >Do you think Esri should move any and all existing python related discussions (like those currently in Map Automation, etc) to the future Python subforum?         I would suggest "no".   Contrast:  When we had a sock-drawer "Extensions" forum, the overwhelming request was to split them.   We created 12 forums on these fairly discrete topics.  There is reasonably very little overlap between them; little complex weaving that connects some of them.   Then I plowed backward through time over 500 threads manually and neatly parsed them out into the new set of separate extensions forums.  It only took about a day or so.  There were very very few that stumped us as to where to put them. In the case of Python, that will be nearly impossible to do cleanly in a way that makes sense to most of us.  Some threads are cleanly about Python syntax, others are really about some operational topic that uses Python heavily, and some are really about some problem to solve that might include later some post about Python code. So to support in a way what Goh_Raj is saying, the factors which will make it difficult to split out old threads is exactly the same issue that will make it tough to know where to start threads going forward.  If I'm doing map automation or if I'm doing geoprocessing, is my topic really about that, or is it about using Python to do that.  And then after I pose the question, depends on how people reply.   The thread could really dive into Python headfirst, or it could stop talking about Python altogether. Again we're back to:  "I'm using Python to do some GP task.  Which forum do I put it in?" But then, against Goh_Raj's point we have done this successfully before.   We've had very successful forums in the past labeled "VBA" or "Java" or labeled "AML", "Avenue", "ArcObjects", or "MapObjects", or what have you, that have helped folks learn how to code against these APIs and solve problems regardless of the type of operation (GP, symbology, map output, projections, some industry-unique application, etc.) Example:  I'm coding ArcObjects to do some Geocoding.  I may get a good answer if I post in the Geocoding forum.  I may get a good answer if I post in the ArcObjects forum.  I may just go ahead and post in both forums.  I'd rather let users decide.   But this example supports the creation of a Python forum despite it making things more complicated in some situations.   Or maybe we need a forum software that allows you to make a single thread appear in more than one forum if you want.  This one doesn't. In my estimation, starting a new "Python" forum will make some usage of the forums more confusing.  But in the end, if what you're there to talk about is Python scripting, regardless of what you're doing with Python, you would have a single place to go that would be watched by others who are also primarily wanting to talk about and help you with Python. >If Jim were to create a new forum for Python, what is the argument to  not consolidate existing Python-related posts from other forums there  (other than it being a pain in the :o)? We'd leave the old ones where they are. Doing so would be trying to judge shades of gray with the question Is it white or black?   In the future, we would hope that if a user's question is MORE about Python scripting than GP or whatever else they're doing with Python, hopefully they'll put it in the Python forum.  If their question is MORE about GP, and the use of Python is helpful yet incidental to the topic being discussed, hopefully they'll put it into the GP forum.   If we go that route, that's the best we can expect. >But if Jim has a magic wand to do that sort of thing, by all means. LOL.  No.  I split the extensions ones manually myself.  And that had nice clear lines.  This simply doesn't. >Why not just create a new thread called Python, and see if it grows.   Keep the existing GP forum, keep all the existing posts where they  currently are at, let the process work itself out.  In 6 months, if  Python is not used, Kill it, and move the stuff in it to other areas. Splitting the Python Forum posts back into the forums that cover topics they're using Python for would be easy.  Black and white.  Going the opposite way, that is, plowing through all of the other forums to determine which ones should be moved to a "Python" forum is gray.   But I'd rather not consider "ease of reversal" as a factor as to whether or not we should do it. ***There is and will be no clear-cut answer. ***All of the ideas in this thread will make something easier while making something else more difficult. ***What we decide will be what we think helps the most and breaks the least. Thank you all again for your input.  I expect that not everyone will agree with me.  That would be strange if you all did.  But I ask you to trust that my intent is to do what you all want.  It's your forum.  It has to serve askers and answers, and changes need to fix more than they break. ... View more

made sticky -jb ... View more

Jim - Perhaps you can now unstick this thread so it slowly dies away. Just when it's starting to pick up again?  Eh, I'll leave it up for a while. Maybe Chris Snyder has a more interesting angle that might generate more agreement and activity.  That's why I Stuck his thread yesterday.   That is, the idea that we leave the Geoprocessing Forum the way it is, but just create a new one called "Python".   That isn't to say that there won't be some python in the GP forum if it's secondary to the topics being discussed, (or secondary to any discussion in any forum if Python keeps spreading throughout the ArcGIS system) but then if someone wants a place where they can question, answer, learn, and discuss things that are primarily Python or only Python, they'll have a place to go. The possible downside (small?) is that if someone's working GP using Python, I expect we'd get people asking "Do I post it in GP or in Python?".  Or they'll just cross-post to both.  Maybe that's not a huge problem.  Especially seeing that the GP forum as a whole only sees about 4 or 5 new threads a day on average. (Side Note:  It appears Chris asked that his new "Python Scripting forum" thread be deleted.  Looks like he may repost as a poll.) ... View more

Would be possible to set the code gallery so that it could be sorted by dateadded/last modified and also to be able to subscribe to see when new code is added/modified? Thanks, Simon The galleries on the ArcGIS Resource Center, like this one here for Geoprocessing, allows you to sort the list by the original submission date, or by the date the entries were last modified.   Also, the RSS icon toward the upper right allows you to subscribe to the gallery so that when items are added or updated you would be notified. [ATTACH=CONFIG]2914[/ATTACH] ... View more

Closure? Decisions? Silence on the issue??? Deciding to split would be a lot easier if there was a stronger consensus.  Like when we split the extensions forums.   From what I'm seeing in this thread the input has been very light (compared to the total number of GP forum users) and those who have weighed in are collectively divided.    Until the community strongly wants a change, we should probably leave it as-is. ... View more

I am not averse to 4 categories like Chris S. mentions, but please do not go back to the old style. Just to recap a little... The old style for GP were three forums:  "ArcGIS Desktop - Geoprocessing ArcToolbox" "ArcGIS Desktop - Geoprocessing Modelbuilder" "ArcGIS Desktop - Geoprocessing Scripting (Python, JavaScript, VB)" At the moment we have some support for three new ones: "Geoprocessing Tools" "Modelbuilder" "Python Scripting" ...and then seeing who else jumps on Chris' idea for a 4th: "Geoprocessing Workflows" ... View more

Jim, Sorry for the resurgence/mentioning of the organization, tagging and drill down ideas. Those are beside the point... Ok for now that's good.  Because I've taken a few stabs at comprehensively designing out your idea fully and from the angles I've tried so far it becomes a knarly mess.    I know it doesn't seem that way as you sketched it out quickly with only a few examples.   But so far it's a mess.  Ok, not quite 200 nodes, but close.  Throw out?  No.  But it's an idea that would need to be played out quite a bit before its usability seems simpler.   Perhaps you're just looking at it from the perspective of an GIS Pro who mostly uses Desktop, I don't know.   The Esri-wide landscape of products, functional uses, and user personas is a lot larger than that. After Chris Mathers became decided, the votes are 6 to 2 in favor of splitting. To be candid, I sort of wish we had more input than 8 people.  Are there dozens or hundreds of users out there who are mostly ok with it being one forum and just didn't weigh in?   I guess after splitting I'll see if we get a wave of complaints.  Or if in using the split forums we start to see more misposting, cross-posting, etc.   But after we opened it up for input, only right to go with the opinions of those who took the time to speak up. 1. Close the "ArcGIS Desktop - General" forum topic, and redirect it to a new forum topic called "Other/General" in the Functions section. As I think Dan was trying to point out, the majority of ArcGIS Desktop questions are being posted to the "General" forum, and in fact the vast majority concern a "function". Not unless the list of functions is also comprehensively expanded to cover all logical functional groupings.  The current "Functions" list only includes the major ones. I don't think this was ESRI's intention at all, No, you're right it wasn't.  The intention was to create "Functions" forums to directly support the "Functions" sections of the resource center.  Just major functions that would support large communities of users and forum activity.  These functions (like GP, Raster, Geocoding, Carto, etc.) should not be fragmented by product.  That was a big mistake in the old forums.  These are issues and concepts that apply regardless if you are a Desktop user, creating and managing servers and services, or designing and coding applications. "Other/General" forum (properly placed in the Functions section  - NOT the Products section - I can only see this helping if we reorganize the forums to contain only Functions and eliminate any breakdown by Product.   As many reasons as you can give why we should do this (and it's an intriguing idea I don't yet disagree with), there are reasons against.  For one, there are still issues that are specific to "products", like installation, configuration, licensing. I think I'm hearing that your confusion comes from the fact that the Functions forums are incomplete, hence the Product-General forums end up being the leftover bucket.   If so, will anyone watch or care about an even larger "general" bucket called "Functions General/Other"?  I don't know.  Just asking. ModelBuilder Scripting (Python) Tools (ArcToolbox) Workflow Well, the good news is that we can try that.  It'll take some work to split threads backwards, but probably just a few days.  Going forward it will work.   And if it fails miserably, merging them back into one will take a few minutes to do.   Of course our hope and expectation is that the split forums will succeed. Anyway... I'm done. I hope not.   You've given us a lot of your time and ideas.  All greatly appreciated.   I hope at the same time you can appreciate that we cannot look at this from only the perspective of one type of user, or one person's perspective.   Any change we make - of any kind - is going to be liked by some and thought by others as us trying hard to make their life difficult. ... View more

Hmm... I'm confused. Of course you make some good points Chris.   But for any good idea is at least a con or two against.   For example, would multi-level expandable trees that drill down to over 200 nodes be cleaner and simpler than what we have now, which is a single flat level of about 60 forums?   I don't know.   If I thought first "I'm using a software product", then maybe.   But if I thought first "I'm trying to do -something-", then maybe not. I tell you what I'm fairly convinced of though.  Regardless of how we design it, there will be a handful of users who will voice quite strongly that we chose the dumbest way possible.   😉 ... View more

Chris et al. check this out http://gis.stackexchange.com/ click on a tag and you get what your want, specify your tags of interest and you can ignore the garbage...no threading...just what you want to look at and answer...soooo the onus is on the user to tag their questions in the hopes that they will get an answer...crappy tags...no answers...a potential model BUT if separate forums are to be kept, then tags should/need be a must/wish/hope I think most who use them would say that StackOverflow/StackExchange is probably the best design for a Q&A site.  Are you saying it's time to consider leaving threaded discussions behind and support only Q&A? ... View more

...and I will reiterate, those with questions "my exported script from Modelbuilder doesn't work" will post in both a "hope it doesn't exist" Python section along with the Python mapping folk. In any event, I know which forums I will check and as the list gets longer, the chances of visits will get shorter for many people...train the dog 🙂 Right or wrong, Dan's point above pretty much describes a primary reason for why the 3 old GP forums were collapsed into 1 new one. So let me ask the group...  If we split this one forum into three, it may seem more right to put all Python stuff into this bucket over here and Modelbuilder issues into that bucket over there, but if you are using Geoprocessing in ArcGIS, isn't splitting them just going to make most users want to keep their eye on three forums instead of one? I mean, I am really asking that in an open way, not in a "help me prove my point" way.  My point doesn't count.  I'm all for advocating that we do this the way YOU ALL want, not the way I might want it.   I'm just trying to make sure I understand how you all use the forums. ... View more

Regardless of your beliefs either way, the vote tally so far (ESRI employees are not included): Thanks for taking the time to tabulate. Sounds like we're getting close to tying up this thread and taking some action.  We just wanted to make sure anyone who wanted a voice got plenty of chance. (ESRI employees are not included): Well, for what it's worth, I've spoken with a bunch of Esri staff about this, especially those from the GP team and Tech Support, and votes are fairly well split.   Even if you counted us in, it won't help the tally become any more clear. Personally, I think the tag idea has merit. However, with the new forum and resource center site in it's current state of dysfunctionality, the chance of an already busy ESRI staff quickly implementing a brand new method (that presumably requires substantial R&D) to consistently "scrape" and apply appropriate "metatags" to forum posts is exceedingly unlikely. Fwiw, I think the tag idea is a good one but only if done manually by moderators who really know what they're doing.  I would not trust automation built on a rulebase.  I'd wonder if the effort to continue dialing-in the rules and the error rate of miscategorizing is more than the effort to manually moderate an average of 6 new threads per day.   And then there are those threads that would straddle the three forums if they were split the old way.  No manual or automated process completely solves that. I think ESRI had it right in the old forum, and it seemed to work quite well. In the interest of helping posters and contributors alike, my vote is for ESRI to swiftly split the existing Geoprocessing Forum into: 1.) Scripting (Python) 2.) Modelbuilder 3.) Tools (ArcToolBox) Correct.  If we went back to the old way, it would be those three. BTW: Cudos to ESRI for getting rid of the 'Nautical Mapping' forum... Well, not got rid of, just moved.  It's the "Esri Nautical Solution" forum now, under the Solutions section. ... View more

An off-topic sub-discussion within this thread was split off and moved here. ... View more

Ditto Joe. So specifically, if you go to the ArcGIS Explorer Labs group: http://www.arcgis.com/home/group.html?owner=arcgis_explorer&title=ArcGIS%20Explorer%20Labs Then toward the top right change "Show:" from "Web Content Only" to "All Content".  You will then see the full list of sample ArcGIS Explorer Add-ins and other examples from the ArcGIS Explorer team. ... View more