Latest Contributions by Andrew-Bowne

So you are saying that it works the first time and then when you repeat the same workflow for a second time it sends you to the outbox instead of opening the survey again for input?   That's odd and behavior I am not experiencing. Are you clicking the same link the second time?  It almost sounds like the itemID is not correct. ... View more

image-map appearance is not supported when using the web form: AndrewBowne_0-1615913138376.png   ... View more

Looks like callbacks are partially implemented.  This article is a bit old and refers to Collector and not Field Maps however I'm sure it could be adapted appropriately as Field Maps is smart launchable: https://community.esri.com/t5/arcgis-survey123-questions/app-link-callback-to-collector/td-p/727103   ... View more

Thanks for the clarification, Calvin.  I ended up going through the AGO Assistant and wiping out any layerDefinition properties for the Feature Layer in the JSON and that seemed to "force" the Webmap to import the most current symbology for that feature layer.  I'm not sure if that's the best workaround but it worked for me.  Tinkering in AGO Assistant is usually a nail-biting experience! Just a suggestion for a possible enhancement:  Within the webmaps feature layer Change Style dialog, perhaps a way to "Fetch Feature Layer Symbology".  Like, an additional option here: AndrewBowne_0-1615831688419.png Thanks, Again -Andrew ... View more

Great Idea.  We have THOUSANDS of 360 photos that we would like to be able to natively view in Esri apps.  Right now we are using a viewer written in-house with 3rd party api's.  ... View more

According to this blog post: https://www.esri.com/arcgis-blog/products/apps/field-mobility/introducing-arcgis-field-maps/ There is no immediate plan to develop Field Maps for Windows.    ... View more

Thanks for the reply, Ismael.  Is this something that might be considered for the future? ... View more

Absolutely.  I'm doing exactly this in several of my scenarios.  Simply add the Create Report module to your scenario, then add an HTTP module to get the report file, finally attach the result to your email.. AndrewBowne_0-1613587757621.png AndrewBowne_1-1613587855722.png     ... View more

I agree, this would be extremely helpful as our users "forget" to refresh the inbox and are constantly asking me where a submitted survey is.   Our workflow is as follows: user conducts an inspection if inspection fails, a user can re-inspect at a later date. Instead of filling out the complete form, user pulls last inspection and creates a copy for a new reinspection if user has not refreshed inbox, the previous inspection does not exist. Or, if another user conducted the first inspection, it will not exist in the inbox. ... View more

Hi @KevinBurke , Thanks for the clarification.   This makes sense and I do see the logic in the as-designed process.  In my workflow we only want to expose a small subset of fields for editing while retaining the default values of some of the other fields.  This would help keep the popup less cluttered and only allow the end user to focus on collecting only a few fields of data. Here is our use case: User is collecting (or copying from existing features) interior electrical assets.   For this task they are collecting only Emergency Lights.  The edit template for the feature class already has default values set for Asset Type (Emergency Light), Floor(<Floor ID>), Building(<BuildingID>), Responsible Party (Engineering), etc.  These attributes we do not want the user to edit but we do want retained.  What we do want them to edit is: Make, Model, Serial Number, Panel, Circuit.  Those all are configured properly and work as expected.  When a user creates a new feature, the default attributes (asset type, building, floor) are populated behind the scenes since they are defined in the editing template.  When a user copies an existing feature (helpful when you have a space with several of the same emergency lights), only the editable attributes are carried over and not the default attributes from the source feature or from the editing template. It sounds like we will have to expose these fields and hope that the user stays away from them! Thank You, Andrew ... View more