Latest Contributions by Billy

Hi abureaux,  Thanks for your answer. I tried the fixed and dynamic grid options, but the result was similar and not what I expected.  Looking at your pictures I noticed that maybe the order of the questions has and effect in the grid. In your example the select_one question with the Other option is after, and the grid honored the appearance by keeping the 2 questions side-by-side.  I did the same thing, and the result is good enough for me. Fortunately, in this case the order of the questions doesn't matter too much.        ... View more

This feature is very well needed and the answer from Mark doesn't address the issue.  ... View more

Hi, I confirmed that the FeatureSet returned by the FeatureSetByRelationshipName was not empty with a count and also used an If statement to check if "t.assetid" was "Null", before posting the question. You can see below the and image showing the the FeatureSets are not empty, before and after the filter function. var results_FS = FeatureSetByRelationshipName($feature, 'R0L100Electric_DeviceL1508Device_Unit', ['*'], false) var fs_cnt = Count(results_FS) var transf_FS = Filter(results_FS, "assettype = 785") var transf_fs_cnt = Count(transf_FS) var t = First(transf_FS) var s = TypeOf(t) domainName($feature, 'assettype') + ': ' + $feature.assetid + ': ' + '/ FeatureSet Count:' + fs_cnt + ' / Transf FeatureSet Count: ' + transf_fs_cnt + ' / Object Type: ' + s   Now, after adding the check if the Feature is "Null" then the code passes the validation and also returns the fields from the related record. It looks like the code validation requires handling the exception of possible "Null" feature before being able to access the fields. As you can see in the image below the code is able to get the fields and show them in the Pop-up, so it was never "Null".   var results_FS = FeatureSetByRelationshipName($feature, 'R0L100Electric_DeviceL1508Device_Unit', ['*'], false) var transf_FS = Filter(results_FS, "assettype = 785") var t = First(transf_FS) if(t == null) { return "Some default value" } if(IsEmpty(t.assetid)){ return domainName($feature, 'assettype') + ': ' + $feature.assetid } else { var id = t.assetid var power = t.powerrating/1000 domainName($feature, 'assettype') + ': ' + $feature.assetid + ': ' + id + ' (' + power + ')' }     ... View more

Hi Johannes, Thanks for the reply. You are right about the array of dictionaries, I didn't think about looping the feature set of related records to create the dictionary. Regards. ... View more

Hi sjet1010, You could export the asset package (including your data) using the "Export Asset Package" geoprocessing tool and deploy the package to a FGDB. When working with attribute rule in FGDB You have to keep in mind that some Arcade scripts could work in the FGDB but won't have the same behavior/result in the Enterprise Geodatabase. Another alternative is to create a testing environment by copying your operational Enterprise Geodatabase to a different instance of your DBMS, this option will allow you to test your attribute rules in a similar environment as your operational data. ... View more

Hi Johan, I was behind on the server's patches. I applied all of them, but I still have the dirty areas coming back after posting. I will have to call tech-support. ... View more

Hi, There is an additional behavior of the Validate + Reconcile + Post edits workflow mentioned above that I find strange. After validating the dirty areas in the Default version, if you return to the named version all the dirty areas that were previously validated are back. The link that you provide have this paragraph: When a version is reconciled with the default version, dirty areas that exist in the named version will remain and dirty areas are created from edits generated by the reconcile process. Likewise, when edits from a named version are posted to the default version, dirty areas are created for edits that were made in the named version. This includes edits that were previously validated in the named version. According to the workflow described above the dirty areas in named version were validated before Reconcile + Post. Looking at the documentation, I interpret the bold text above as saying that only the dirty areas that were not validated before the Reconcile should persist, but that's not what I have experienced. When I return to the named version I have to validate again all the edits or Reconcile again to remove all the dirty areas in the named version. Is this the expected behavior? My system configuration is this: Enterprise 10.8.1 and Pro 2.9. Regards. ... View more