Latest Contributions by SamMontoia1

It would be really helpful to return to a ground to grid correction value from a feature or set of features.  Maybe also having a ground to grid correction value for a 'record' feature would be awesome.  Maybe when you switch to the active record this ground to grid value could also be applied.  ... View more

  var records_features = FeatureSetByName($datastore, "<insert records feature class here>", ["Name", "GlobalID"], false); var ret_guid = $feature.RetiredByRecord var match = Filter(records_features, "GlobalID = @ret_guid"); var matchfeature = first(match); if (matchfeature != null){ return matchfeature.Name } return null   Here is an attempt at making an Arcade Expression for the looking up the  Retired By GUID and pushing the Retired By name into an additional field. It might be a little more generic and more easily adapted to other ParcelTypes.  ... View more

@AmirBar-Maorthanks for the idea "GUID a very unique FeatureID."  That's helpful in understanding their use.  And I also understand why the model uses them and their favored status.  I reckon the trade-off is that as they are designed as much for computers and the software to understand, and their autogeneration is both a blessing and a curse.  My argument/point is that the GUID for a record does not appear in the Active Record box; instead it's the Name field value for the active record; and that's likely because it's more understandable to the human users. Also the Record information is what is being displayed there; vs. Parcel Table that is the subject of this thread;  It seems like I am not the only one, but most often I am looking at the Table of selected parcel features.  And it would be more meaningful to have a list of names/document numbers than Record GUIDs in the each parcel's retired by and created by fields in the table.  It's a combination of it matching the documents I am working from and that the number is simpler than a GUID.  Your answers certainly help me understand the structure of the parcel fabric and GUIDs, so again thank you.  @jcarlsonI would be interested in some sample code/attribute rules depicting how you accomplish Amir's suggestion.  Thank you.      ... View more

Maybe a more appropriate title/caption for the check box-switch would be "use selectable layers only", and it should be above Target and Source drop downs or even below all of this would be ok to me, but it is just a check box and its only function would be to reduce the above Target and Source Drop downs in this menu to match the selectable layers when it is checked.  And in my mind it would be so transient as to really only affect those two drop downs.  As it stands I have 20+ layers that are reference layers in this particular project and I don't transfer attributes from them.  But I find myself constantly having to ensure that the layers I do want to transfer attributes between, I just have to re-map them early and often because I am never quite sure that the transferring is happening as I am expecting/wanting.  Plus the names of my fields are different between the target and the source layers. I find that controlling the selectable layers in a Pro Project is a nice way of mapping my reference layers without having them clutter auxiliary menus.    ... View more

@RichardFairhurstIt isn't a huge help; and I guess I was thinking of ways of limiting a very long list of layers in the Source/Target drop downs.  And this toggle switch would just limited the drop downs to Selectable layers.  Something like this:  ... View more

Thanks for the suggestions @AmirBar-Maor .  And yes, I could hide the Created by Record; and Retired by Record GUIDs on my Parcels attribute table.  Though, I do hope it's clear that I am suggesting to have Created by and Retired by Name/Number instead of the Record GUID appear in the Parcels Table. Just like the Name/Number appears in the Active record Box (not the GUID).  Sorry I can't think of the term used to describe this Active Record Box:     Regarding your suggestions 2. and 3. and in context to the Record GUID as it appears in the Attribute Table;  Is this understanding correct:  ArcGIS Pro is assigning the Record GUID to the parcel and parcel lines features as they are created and updated.  Based on the Active Record and the actions taken.  Retiring a parcel assigns the Active Record's GUID to the Retired by field in the Parcel layer, and of course creating features pushes the active record's GUID to the Created_by field in the parcels layer.  And the phrase "among other things" seems apt for both retiring and creating features.  What about making a pair of joins to the record table based on Created by and Retired by and Record GUIDs?  At the very least one join to the Records Table based on the Parcels Created by: to the Record GUID seems to work.  (and then I have hidden all the other fields except Record Name).  Multiple joins probably isn't a great approach, and also multiple joins to the same table doesn't seem to be allowed.  Seems to cause a 'glitch in the matrix'.  But one join is allowed. I do like the idea of "on the fly" displays, and creating attribute fields and rules <- I will try that too.     ... View more

Yes, Exactly.  My idea is to limit the drop-down lists of layers for Target and Source within the field mapping dialog with a check box that would confine these lists to either the selectable layers or the editable layers. Toggled on the Target/Source layer lists would only show editable or selectable layers, toggled off it would show all layers.  Also I didn't know that the copy/paste is controlled by the field mapping.  So thanks for that bit.  I also noticed that selectable layers are the only ones that allow attribute transfers too, which is fine behavior; but all the more reason to limit the layers in the drop-down when doing the field-mapping dialogue.  Or at least have an option to limit the list.      ... View more

For me the attribute table is where this issue exists.  But really any where the Record GUID appears in the context of a parcel or parcel line.  i.e. retired by: Record Number or name created by: Record Number or Name is more useful information to display in my workflow than the Record GUID.  Historic Parcels same story.  I think it should be the default behavior, as the Parcel Fabric is Records-Driven and as a user,  I certainly care more about  the Name/Number I have assigned a record than the Record GUID that the system assigns for me automatically.     Below in Green I have highlighted a sample of my table of the field view. It's my parcel layer.        Thanks for the links about adding this info to a popup.  I will try that too. The active record  doesn't display the GUID, similar story for the attribute editor displayed in your message.  ... View more

and to be clear, the misclose distance in Pro is 0.01 feet, and graphically it looks like it closes too within the Parcel Drafter tool.  Anyway I guess I wonder if the error displayed in the tool is a bug of some kind.  I have tried to build the polygon with a chord-bearing/distance instead of the curve in this description.  And that seems to close properly.  Other practice descriptions close when curves or arcs are not included.  Thanks for any and all insight.   ... View more

The Layout's orientation, Color setting from Pro should override the default printer setting by default.  Why is that such a scandal?  it would be nice if I didn't have to look this problem up.  ... View more

as a work around, Running the notebook in Jupyter notebooks (not Jupyter Lab) the Mapview displays properly.  There does seem to be a mapview.jupyter_target variable that's listed on the arcgis.widgets module api reference that is read_only.  though it can be set to "lab" or other string if you force it. But that doesn't seem to help anything. Also prior to setting it as I show below, reading the data produces an empty string.  I don't understand if this variable is just not set, but it also seems like it should be set based on the IDE you're using.  Is that the disconnect here?  This seems like the problem variable but again how to reset a read_only variable is elusive to me right now. ... View more

I have had the same experience of restarting Pro and "fixing" the issue.  ... View more