|
POST
|
The widget I've developed opens a SubWidget in a panel and uses the dojo border container, content pane, and accordion pane to display a dgrid and some tools. When moving the widget into the web app builder framework I am experiencing a weird issue that is hard for me to diagnose. Before the Constructor method is fired, the other icons in that upper panel move into the map area adjacent to where the panel is about to be rendered.
... View more
07-21-2017
07:13 AM
|
0
|
1
|
488
|
|
POST
|
What scale are you zoomed into? Is you service hosted on AGOL?
... View more
06-29-2017
02:10 PM
|
0
|
0
|
313
|
|
POST
|
Thanks a bunch!! With the new API is it best practice to use Web Mercator for everything? There is a setting I see on the Feature Layers that is called "generalizedForScale = 4000". This does look like the scale at which the geometry is stuck at. Are you able to tell if this property on your feature services changes with the scale in the map changing?
... View more
06-29-2017
01:20 PM
|
0
|
2
|
1436
|
|
POST
|
Hi Thomas, I've queried for a specific OID and returned the JSON at the bottom. Some things I've found through testing. 1. The more features are in the layer, the more significant the modification of the geometry by the view. There are 900 plus polygons in this layer. When I published a small selection of the features there was less modification of the geometry by the view. 2. The modification seems to be more drastic when feature are reprojected on the fly. I am trying to use all State Plane maps since it does not require that I reproject any data. For now I am testing with a basemap and features in Web Mercator. 3. The geometry returned by query on a bad feature is identical to the geometry returned by the same query on a subset of the same features published as a separate service. In this case, the subset geometry looks better, whereas the full layer has issues. { "fields": [ { "alias": "Leasee", "domain": null, "editable": false, "length": 50, "name": "Leasee", "nullable": true, "type": "esriFieldTypeString" } ], "spatialReference": { "latestWkid": 6523, "wkid": 103102 }, "geometryType": "esriGeometryPolygon", "features": [ { "geometry": { "rings": [ [ [ 2289245.933, 14859004.976 ], [ 2289245.891, 14858999.994 ], [ 2289235.697, 14859000.08 ], [ 2289235.739, 14859005.061 ], [ 2289245.933, 14859004.976 ] ] ], "spatialReference": { "latestWkid": 6523, "wkid": 103102 } }, "attributes": { "Leasee": "Perkins, Lonnie" } } ], "exceededTransferLimit": null } The above json was returned for both of the geometries highlighted below.
... View more
06-29-2017
11:11 AM
|
0
|
4
|
1436
|
|
POST
|
Following up: I published both Web Mercator and State Plane polygons and they both showed the modified geometry. I exported the data from AGOL to a file geodatabase and verified that the data was uploaded and is being stored in the correct geometry. After reading more on the LayerView. It seems that issue lies in there somewhere. The default settings, whatever they may be is not delivering the correct data to the client when zooming in to large scales. It is as if the geometry is being rendered like the camera is far away.
... View more
06-28-2017
08:59 PM
|
0
|
6
|
1436
|
|
POST
|
State Plane is supported in the Local Scene just as any other projection. I double checked the projects for the basemap and the layers and they are both in the same state plane projection. It looks to me like the data is generalized for display at a small scale and delivered to the client initially. When I zoom in the geometries are not being redrawn with a less degree of generalization. To be more precise, it is not appear to be generalizing vertices, just moving them based upon the scale and pixel size.
... View more
06-28-2017
12:34 PM
|
0
|
0
|
1436
|
|
POST
|
It is difficult to explain clearly the first time..... In the 3.x api the shapes are normal, but when I view them in the 4.x api they are modified. Even if I use the MapView from the 4.x api. So right now I don't know if the issue is the View on the Map or the layer in the map.
... View more
06-28-2017
07:04 AM
|
0
|
0
|
1436
|
|
POST
|
It appears that the features rendered in the WebView and MapView have a higher max allowable offset than the same features rendered in a web map in AGOL. The 90 degree angles look good in the 2d api, but when they are drawn in 3d, they turn into non-90 degree angles. My guess is that the 3D api enforces a higher max-allowable offset which is making the data quality poor. I am going to try to manually adjust this setting on each layer in the scene, but I am wondering whether this is the correct approach. Has anyone else run into this issue with shapes being modified in 3d at large scale? The first image shows the polygons in a web map in AGOL The second image show the same web map rendered in an Map View on my test connect web server. As you can tell, there is a major issue happening somewhere
... View more
06-27-2017
03:06 PM
|
0
|
11
|
2213
|
|
POST
|
Hi Derek, Is the functionality to modify the popup for the results layer in the Query widget (just an example) in Portal embedded WAB something that will be possible? Do you know how to get the popup for the results to be identical to the popup for the layer in the webmap? We are receiving complaints that the results popup does not show the links that we created for the layer.
... View more
06-01-2017
01:04 PM
|
0
|
1
|
1330
|
|
POST
|
This is most likely the problem. When I open up the project today and start working there are not any issues with editing the table. In the future when this happens again I will look for whether the Save and Discard icons are activated. If they are not activated where would I look next? A better question is, Can you reference any documentation that discusses the hierarchy of the editing environment in Pro?
... View more
06-01-2017
06:51 AM
|
0
|
1
|
1736
|
|
POST
|
Hello, ArcPro 1.4 does not allow me to edit a many-to-many relationship table. Instead I get an error message saying that the data is locked and in use by another user. There are no other users on my machine. What I close Pro and reopen I get the same error. I don't see any lock files in the geodatabase. I realize that Pro Editing sessions are not the same as ArcMap, but I don't have a clue as to how I can fix this. Any ideas? The geodatabase is the default project geodatabase. Maybe that is the problem. Should I not use the geodatabase created for the project by Pro?
... View more
05-30-2017
10:14 AM
|
0
|
4
|
2292
|
|
POST
|
Good idea on using a map as the input. I have been using the Mosaic Dataset -> Generate Tiling Scheme -> Manage Tile Cache -> Export Tile Cache (tpk) I'll just build the tiling scheme from a map instead. Come to think of it, since AGOL does not support image services maybe that is why the mosaic dataset does not work as the input to the package?
... View more
05-10-2017
10:34 AM
|
1
|
0
|
4146
|
|
POST
|
The projection I am using is a State Plane projection that matches the elevation layer I want to drape the imagery over. The scales are set from 1,152 to 5xx,xxx increasing by a factor of two each time. The only thing different about this tile package from other ones is that the source data in the mosaic dataset is in jp2 format which is compressed. The total tile package size is 6.5GB when using this source data. If I export to Tiff first then create a tile package it is over 30GB. So my main question is whether the raster file type is affecting the creation of the service. There isn't anything I've found that points to jp2 as being the culprit for the failed service but what else could it be? I guess I will try and publish a single small jp2 raster as a tile package and publish it.
... View more
05-10-2017
10:20 AM
|
0
|
2
|
4146
|
|
POST
|
I am getting the same error when trying to publish a tile package as a tile layer in AGOL. The one thing I wonder is if using jp2 files is not supported as the files are not uncompressed tiffs. I've not seen any info related to this, but it is my hunch. My other hunch is that a rectangular boundary is required. I've been packing irregular shaped boundary datasets and am getting the error. Right now I am sharing a newly created tpk from a mosaic dataset with jp2 source data. The package and the cache both look fine. One thing though, ArcPro will not open any of the tile packages that I create. Is this normal?
... View more
05-10-2017
09:24 AM
|
0
|
4
|
4146
|
|
POST
|
Daniel, During the unpacking, are there issues when using jp2 files as the source data going into a tile package? Do you know if a tile package created from jp2 source data can be published in AGOL?
... View more
05-10-2017
09:21 AM
|
0
|
0
|
560
|
| Title | Kudos | Posted |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 01-30-2020 05:48 AM | |
| 1 | 07-24-2020 06:10 AM | |
| 1 | 03-24-2020 10:04 AM | |
| 1 | 01-11-2022 05:32 AM | |
| 1 | 10-04-2021 06:14 AM |
| Online Status |
Offline
|
| Date Last Visited |
08-05-2022
08:48 AM
|