|
POST
|
If you don't specify a path for your log file, then by default ArcGIS Online Notebooks will log to standard out, and you will see your log messages appear in the output cell. (Note that the default log level is warning, so you will only see log messages in the output cell that are of level warning or higher.) You can use logging.baseConfig() to specify a file in which to store your logging messages instead. You can also adjust the logging level, if you want to see messages from other levels. For example, import logging logging.basicConfig( filename = r'/arcgis/home/example.log', level = logging.DEBUG ) logging.debug('A DEGBUG log message.')
... View more
05-29-2021
11:50 AM
|
2
|
1
|
3038
|
|
IDEA
|
This would be helpful as workaround. In the long run, it would be better to have the underlying issues with system design addressed. Of all the SaaS solutions we use institution-wide, it is only the ones with very poorly designed user experiences that have support staff stooping to this level.
... View more
05-27-2021
05:25 AM
|
0
|
0
|
2214
|
|
BLOG
|
@fstring if you have the time, it would be great to see the results shared here from running the ArcGIS Pro Performance Analysis Tool (PAT) on your M1 setup. I'm personally interested in how it does on the graphics related tests. (If you have not used PAT yet, please see the recent blog post for more information: Announcing the ArcGIS Pro Performance Assessment Tool (PAT).)
... View more
05-27-2021
05:19 AM
|
1
|
0
|
48454
|
|
POST
|
@Todd_Metzler yes, Hub has been a great fit for a few of our large, more complex collaborations involving external participants, especially collaborations with a need to support open data services or requiring a web site presence. However, Hub has a very steep learning curve and its wealth of functionality has generally proven to be overkill for users interested in simple collaborations. For the use cases I outlined above, our users are looking for simple ways to collaborate with external folks, simpler than Hub at least. Their main goal is typically limited to sharing content via ArcGIS Online with collaborators both within and outside of our organization, and for read-only or read-write collaboration. Regular and Shared Update groups have been a good match for such use cases, though with the potential pain point I touched on in in my post: how to easily involve external collaborators. Furthermore, such users have typically already formed their "community", prior to needing to incorporate ArcGIS Online into it. They are already collaborating in Google or Microsoft Productivity apps, cloud storage (DropBox/Google Drive/Box/OneDrive), Canvas/Blackboard courses, etc.; all of which easily and intuitively support user-managed collaboration. While GIS can be a key component in various steps of the research lifecycle, collaboration is what sites at the core of the propose, collect, process, analyze, share, preserve, and re-use cycle. And, ArcGIS Online's support for collaboration, while improving, still feels like it leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to fitting users' needs and expectations.
... View more
05-25-2021
10:58 AM
|
0
|
0
|
2795
|
|
IDEA
|
@OwenGeo - I am not sure that the model of requiring users to have to ask for each specific item type to support collaboration aligns with users' expectations. Our users expect that it is possible for them to share content -- any content -- with a group of collaborators, such that those collaborators have the same ability to work with the content as they do. In other words, they are expecting to operate where the content is owned by the collaboration, not individual users. (When ArcGIS Online lets them down in this respect, it is a big pain point.) In ArcGIS Online, collaboration is significantly more complicated than in other content-management system, and goes against the learned behaviors from most other similar systems. Instead of sharing a piece of content or a folder of content with a list of fellow collaborators (and specifying their privileges), you have to jump through all the hops of deciding what type of group to create (such as a Shared Update group to permit collaboration on content), managing membership of the group, and sharing the desired content with that group. Once users learn, however, that a Shared Update group is the workflow that enables their collaborators to have equivalent responsibilities (i.e., anyone can read/write the shared content), then users also have the expectation set that this will work for any content type. The seemingly random support or non-support for collaboration depending type of content confuses users to no end. Do we have to setup a scheduled Python notebook that looks for new content types added to ArcGIS Online, and when it detects one, it automatically posts an Idea that the new content type needs to support collaboration? 😉 For specific use cases regarding themes, we often have people working collaboratively on a project that have the same level of responsibility for all content. One day one person may need to edit the theme, another time someone else may need to. Or, in another case, one person is asked by another to double-check their changes before publishing the updated theme.
... View more
05-25-2021
09:05 AM
|
0
|
0
|
5399
|
|
POST
|
As the use of ArcGIS Online continues to grow, occurrences where members of our ArcGIS Online organization need to collaborate with members of other institutions' ArcGIS Online organizations are also increasing. Perhaps it is an outside person involved in a service learning project that needs to collaborate with a group of students, or researchers participating in a multi-institutional project, or external participants in a GIS workshop, or students from around the world joining a field project for the summer, and so on... How are you supporting such use cases at your institution? In ArcGIS Online, users have always been able to add people from other ArcGIS Online organizations to groups. That is a good solution for sharing content with collaborators when you want to keep access restricted. It does not, however, enable the external members to collaborate on the content, say edit a Web Map or author a StoryMap. It is a view-only collaboration. The recent addition of Partnered Collaborations in ArcGIS Online addresses that shortcoming by making it possible to add users from a partner ArcGIS Online organization to a Shared Update group. In which case collaborators can now participate in tasks like co-designing a Web Map or co-authoring a StoryMap. Unlike the first case, however, setting up a Partnered Collaboration requires an ArcGIS Online Administrator be involved. That doesn't scale well. As the interest in cross-organization collaboration increases, that means more and more work for the Administrators 😞 Furthermore, there is a limit of 10 Partnered Collaborations for an ArcGIS Online organization. In the last pre-pandemic year, we supported external collaborations with users from 57 different organizations, so Partnered Collaborations wouldn't have scaled-up sufficiently for us in that way either 😞 So what are other ways to facilitate collaboration in ArcGIS Online with external colleagues? Our current solution is to require external collaborators to have affiliate accounts on our Single-Sign-On (SSO) system, so they can access our ArcGIS Online instance. Many higher-ed institutions support the use of affiliate accounts. After all, the need for multi-institution collaboration is not a concept new with ArcGIS Online. (If you aren't sure if affiliate accounts are supported at your institution, then a good place to start is with the folks who helped set up SAML for your ArcGIS Online organization. Or, you can do a quick web search for "<your institution> identity and access management single-sign-on affiliate", and you will likely find a good starting point for who to talk to on your campus.) We began using this solution as soon as we enabled SAML on our ArcGIS Online instance, and we've found it to offer a number of key advantages in supporting cross-institutional collaborations: You are leveraging established practices at your institution. There is no limit on how many different organizations external collaborators might come from. No effort is required from the ArcGIS Online Administrator (other than the initial configuration of SAML to authorize affiliate accounts.) Those directly involved in (or with an understanding of) the collaboration are responsible for managing the affiliate's access to ArcGIS Online. (Not the ArcGIS Online Administrator, who likely has no idea who the user is, or who their external collaborators are, or for how long the collaboration needs to last.) Are others using affiliate accounts to facilitate cross-institutional collaboration in ArcGIS Online? Have you found other alternatives that work well?
... View more
05-21-2021
07:35 AM
|
1
|
2
|
3080
|
|
POST
|
We've used a couple of their earlier RS+ models at our university for a several years. Overall pleased with them. They delivered the expected level of accuracy under various conditions, good battery life, robust in the hands of clumsy researchers, inexpensive compared to the competition, base-rover configuration works great when outside of the US, etc. The downsides for us were: (1) only compatible with the Android version of Field Maps (we have a lot of iOS users), and (2) the user experience with getting them setup, configured, and ready-to-use (version 3 of the ReachView app is a definite improvement, however, it still is overly complicated and can lead to a lot of lost time in the field, even with very detailed instructions to follow.) Our GNSS selection criteria in Higher-Ed are perhaps weighted more towards ease-of-use (also implying ease-of-support) than other sectors, given our constantly changing user base with students graduating and so on. For us, devices like the Bad Elf Flex, though more expensive, have been much easier for folks to adapt to, but they lack the ability to pair into a Base-Rover configuration. So we are still on the lookout for a "prefect" solution.
... View more
05-21-2021
06:49 AM
|
1
|
2
|
5590
|
|
IDEA
|
It would be great to see user tags surfaced in the user interface for purposes like filtering, sorting, and searching. It would be helpful when viewing lists of users, as a column in appropriate types of usage report exports, as a filtering option for some of the views in the Status Dashboard, and so on. Basically anywhere that one of the axes of presentation is users. (Behind the scenes the User object already supports a tags property, however, it is not currently surfaced in the UI. You have to utilize it via the Python or REST APIs, e.g., see the property list for arcgis.gis.User. For example, you could use information from your organization's enterprise directory store to set tags on users via a scheduled ArcGIS Online Notebook every night. You cannot currently do anything with the tags via the UI, however, you can use the tags programmatically, such as with this Usage Dashboard.)
... View more
05-19-2021
11:06 AM
|
0
|
0
|
3441
|
|
POST
|
I opened a support case with Esri. Seems to be reproducible when using new Map Viewer, clustering, and expressions in the feature-level popup. I haven't been able to make any maps where expressions in the pop-up work. If your two maps are public, would you mind sharing their URLs? I would be curious to see if there are any obvious differences in the JSON definitions that might point to a workaround.
... View more
05-18-2021
09:00 AM
|
0
|
3
|
3684
|
|
BLOG
|
Great picks, Brian! I wish -- especially for students' sake -- that Copy Python Command would include the parameter names in the code it produces. Having only a comma-separated list of values doesn't help someone new to Python and/or ArcGIS understand which value goes with which parameter when they are looking at the code it produces. (See Improve "Copy Python command" by including parameter names.)
... View more
05-17-2021
08:10 AM
|
2
|
0
|
2473
|
|
POST
|
@Ajparker_hlth ever find a solution? I'm seeing this as well. In the new map viewer, with a clustered layer, while configuring the pop-up the expressions show up some of the time, but not always, correctly in the popup. Once I close the configuration, and go to explore other features on the map, the expressions are not displaying in the popup, nor when the map is embedded in a StoryMap.
... View more
05-17-2021
06:59 AM
|
0
|
1
|
3695
|
|
IDEA
|
In order to ensure the same feature layer is consistently displayed using the same clustering parameters on two different web maps, it would be helpful to have some indication in the user interface as to the value of Cluster Radius. For example, when setting Transparency for a layer, the percentage value is displayed as you move the slider. Whether the Cluster radius displays as an actual distance value or as some relative value, the key is having SOME value displayed. Then you can ensure you've dragged the slider to same point in different web maps, so that the same feature layer can be displayed consistently across multiple web maps. [Workaround: If you're comfortable editing your web maps' JSON data, then you can manually edit the value of "clusterRadius" for the desired layer in each web map, and set it to be the same.]
... View more
05-11-2021
12:44 PM
|
3
|
0
|
822
|
|
POST
|
@LindsayG we find that some people at our university want the capability you describe, while others like the current model for the reason @OwenGeo describes. The latter want the extra hurdles there to discourage people from taking their images and potentially using them without honoring the licensing or attribution desires of the story's author. So it's hard to pick a "correct" single behavior that would please everyone at the moment. Meanwhile, as a workaround, users reading your story can "right click - copy image". Then, on a Mac, they can use Preview, File --> New from Clipboard, and save it. Or, on Windows, they can use Paint, and paste the copied image and save it. Perhaps it would work to include instructions like those in the gallery caption for your colouring sheets. (@OwenGeo the link in the post goes to an ArcGIS StoryMap, rather than a Classic one. I expect the mention of Cascade in the title is a mistake.)
... View more
04-23-2021
08:23 AM
|
2
|
0
|
5498
|
|
POST
|
I think arcpy.management.CreateDatabaseConnection might be what you are looking for?
... View more
04-15-2021
02:11 PM
|
0
|
1
|
11902
|
| Title | Kudos | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 3 | 2 weeks ago | |
| 4 | 2 weeks ago | |
| 2 | 04-24-2026 05:42 AM | |
| 1 | 04-23-2026 08:00 AM | |
| 3 | 04-23-2026 10:58 AM |
| Online Status |
Offline
|
| Date Last Visited |
13 hours ago
|