Latest Contributions by Kathleen_Crombez

‎06-06-2024

@AmirBar-Maor- We currently do not use sub-types for current and historical parcels. We wrote a custom process that exports the current and historical features into separate feature classes and created two separate sets of topology rules. One for all current features and one for all historic features. This process is not ideal because it will only identify the errors which then need to be corrected in the actual fabric and then re-exported and checked again after the data is corrected. If sub-types were built into the parcel fabric data model we would not need to do all these extra custom quality control checks. However, I really do like the idea of allowing SQL queries in the topology rules. That would beneficial in many scenarios.

‎06-05-2024

@AmirBar-Maor- Your comment about topology always running on the entire table is not correct. Topology can have different rules for different sub-types. Sub-typing the active and historic parcel types still seems to be the best solution to me.

‎03-12-2024

I did attempt to upgrade the metadata in ArcGIS Pro from the Catalog view. This did not bring in any of the existing FGDC CSDGM metadata. I could see the XML data in SQL Server. Just could not get it to display in Pro.

‎09-20-2023

I am working on a python script that pulls the domain and subtype information from a feature class (or table) and uses that information to update the attribute and entity portion of the metadata. We are using the FGDC CSDGM standards. While testing my code I would manually make edits to a test dataset for validation and export the xml files to view the schema changes. In the ArcGIS Pro attribute editor this is found under Resource > Fields > Entity and Attribute Details When I add multiple enumerated domain values to an attribute a validation error pops up “at least one type of attribute domain is required.” And I get a red X on the Fields tab. The xml schema it creates for this attribute looks like this: <attr> <attrlabl>text_field</attrlabl> <attrdef>text field definition</attrdef> <attrdefs>text field definition source</attrdefs> <attrdomv> <edom> <edomv>v1</edomv> <edomvd>value 1</edomvd> <edomvds>test definition source</edomvds> </edom> <edom> <edomv>v2</edomv> <edomvd>value 2</edomvd> <edomvds>test definition source</edomvds> </edom> <edom> <edomv>v3</edomv> <edomvd>value 3</edomvd> <edomvds>test definition source</edomvds> </edom> </attrdomv> There is a single attribute domain value (attrdomv) tag with multiple enumerated domain (edom) tags nested inside of it. When I run this xml through the USGS metadata validation service (https://www1.usgs.gov/mp/) it reports the following error: Error Attribute_Domain_Values (5.1.2.4) permits only one of Enumerated_Domain (5.1.2.4.1) or Range_Domain (5.1.2.4.2) or Codeset_Domain (5.1.2.4.3) or Unrepresentable_Domain (5.1.2.4.4) When I manually alter the schema of the xml file to include multiple attribute domain value (attrdomv) tags each containing a single enumerated domain (edom) tag the error goes away. This is true in both the USGS validator and the built in validator in ArcGIS Pro. <attr> <attrlabl>text_field</attrlabl> <attrdef>text field definition</attrdef> <attrdefs>text field definition source</attrdefs> <attrdomv> <edom> <edomv>v1</edomv> <edomvd>value 1</edomvd> <edomvds>test definition source</edomvds> </edom> </attrdomv> <attrdomv> <edom> <edomv>v2</edomv> <edomvd>value 2</edomvd> <edomvds>test definition source</edomvds> </edom> </attrdomv> <attrdomv> <edom> <edomv>v3</edomv> <edomvd>value 3</edomvd> <edomvds>test definition source</edomvds> </edom> </attrdomv> However, the metadata editor now displays strangely for this layer. It is displaying an option to insert a new enumerated domain in between each already established domain. Is this a bug in the metadata editor? I am working with ArcGIS Pro v2.9.6 Lastly, I just want to confirm that the second example is the proper what to do this. Is it correct that each enumerated domain (edom) tag should be nested inside of its own attribute domain value (attrdomv) tag. Thank you, Kathleen

‎08-10-2023

We are running Pro 2.9.6 and have entered a domain for every field and still have the error "at least one type of attribute domain is required" also.

‎06-13-2023

We have several feature classes stored in an SDE Enterprise Database that we created metadata for years ago. This metadata is stored in FGDC format. When I view the metadata in ArcCatalog 10.8.2 I am able to see the Summary and Description information that was entered on these feature classes. This is the same information I see in the abstract and purpose tags in the documentation field of the GDB_Items table. However, when I view the metadata in ArcGIS Pro 2.9.6, the Summary and Description are empty. Additionally, when I export the metadata to XML, the abstract and purpose tags are empty. Where does ArcGIS Pro pull the metadata information from? Is it the GDB_Items table? This is not specific to only the Summary and Description, other tags like the publication date, use limitations, etc are all behaving the same way... but Summary and Description are the main ones I am concerned about retrieving. How can I get the metadata that was entered in ArcCatalog years ago to be displayed and exported from Pro? My ArcGIS Pro options are set to view the metadata in FGDC CSDGM Metadata fomat. I have tried to upgrade the metadata and sync it with the data source... but neither of these tools fixed the issue with the metadata not being visible in Pro nor included it in the export to XML.

‎03-28-2023

Thank you @BlakeTerhune !

‎03-28-2023

This was exactly what I was looking for and works perfectly in my application. However, at version 4.24 the watchUtils module is being depreciated and I read that it will be completely removed from the API at some future release. Do you know how to implement this same behavior using the new reactiveUtils module instead?

‎01-20-2023

The parcel fabric features should be subtyped for active and historic. This should be implemented as part of the Parcel Fabric Data Model, as these are very distinctly different types of data. We are finding dangles on the active lines that do not show up in the topology because there is a historical line connected to it. I suspect as we start digging deeper there are going to be other topology issue we are missing due to the historical parcels being part of the validation. One example were this could be a big issue is if you are trying to check all active lots are covered by an active subdivision and the active lot is only covered by a retired subdivision. This will not get caught in the topology as it is. All of the fabric generated rules should be made for both types of data (active types and historic types)

‎01-20-2023

I agree that the parcel fabric features should be subtyped for active and historic. This should be implemented as part of the Parcel Fabric Data Model. We are finding dangles on the active lines that do not show up in the topology because there is a historical line connected to it. I suspect as we start digging deeper there are going to be other topology issue we are missing due to the historical parcels being part of the validation. One example were this could be a big issue is if you are trying to check all active lots are covered by an active subdivision and the active lot is only covered by a retired subdivision. This will not get caught in the topology as it is. All of the fabric generated rules should be made for both types of data (active types and historic types)

‎10-19-2022

I realize this is an old post... but this seems to have always worked in the past on traditional versioning. We currently have no choice but to use branched versioning in the parcel fabric. We recently hired a new employee and want to have his edit version QC'd prior to posting his edits to default. Yesterday he made some edits and even though his version was not included in the list of edit versions, his edits were posted to default anyhow. I use the arcpy.GetMessages(0) to get the reconcile and post messages directly after arcpy.management.ReconcileVersions and the version is not listed in the messages. But the edits were definitely posted to default regardless of it not being included in the edit versions list. Is this possibly a bug in branch versioning?

‎05-25-2022

@Gianluca We forced our IT department to remove Sophos from the servers running ArcGIS Enterprise. They were not happy about it, but we had no choice since the two pieces of software do not seem to play well together. We are still looking for a good Antivirus solution that does not interfere with ArcGIS Enterprise. Our IT department is looking into CrowdStrike, but I have yet to find any information on it's compatibility with ESRI software. If you are running ArcGIS Enterprise version 10.8 (or 10.8.1) there is a server patch you can install that may help with the orphaned services. ArcGIS Server Orphaned Processes Patch https://support.esri.com/en/Products/Enterprise/arcgis-server/ArcGIS-Server/10-8-1#downloads?id=7916 Thanks, Kathleen

‎01-11-2022

Were you ever able to get the clip and ship published in pro? We are having the same issue and I have yet to find a work around now that ArcMap is no longer supported.

‎10-27-2021

we have the same issue. Script ran fine in ArcMap version 10.4.2 it was never fixed and continued all the way through to version 10.8.1 Was hoping they would have fixed this in Pro, but this bug appears to still exist in Pro 2.8.4

‎09-01-2021

not sure if this will help you in your scenario, but i have found that all users (other than the administrator connection doing the compress) must be disconnected from the database in order for the records to be moved from the delta tables and pushed into the base tables when the compress is performed. If any other users are still connected to the database it will only perform a partial compress and it will not push the delta tables to the base tables. we do not edit in the sde.Default (each editor has it's own version). But i would suspect the compress would still act the same way. Not really sure though, because i assume you do not need to reconcile and post your edits when the edits are being done in the sde.default version.

Online Status	Offline
Date Last Visited	‎06-20-2024 05:26 PM

My Ideas

Latest Contributions by Kathleen_Crombez

Re: Topology should ignore parcel fabric lineage history records

Re: Topology should ignore parcel fabric lineage history records

Re: ArcMap Metadata in GDB_Items Not Displaying in Pro

ArcGIS Pro Metadata - FGDC CSDGM Standards - Enumerated Domain

Re: Why am I still showing red X's next to Lineage and Fields when there are no errors listed at the top?

ArcMap Metadata in GDB_Items Not Displaying in Pro

Re: When featurelayer done drawing

Re: When featurelayer done drawing

Re: Topology rules and Parcel connection line subtypes

Re: Topology should ignore parcel fabric lineage history records

Re: arcpy.ReconcileVersions_management WITHOUT reconciling all other versions at the same time

Re: Looking for ArcGIS Enterprise Antivirus Recommendations and Feedback

Re: What will happen with Clip and Ship example in ArcGIS Pro and beyond?

Re: Why does Arcpy script to copy Enterprise geodatabase to gdb fail ERROR 000260 only on Facilities Dataset?

Re: Remove Orphaned Records from Geodatabase

ArcGIS Pro Metadata - FGDC CSDGM Standards - Enume...

ArcMap Metadata in GDB_Items Not Displaying in Pro

Re: What will happen with Clip and Ship example in...

Re: Looking for ArcGIS Enterprise Antivirus Recomm...

Re: Portal License File Fails to Import after Upgr...