POST
|
Excellent! Thanks for the quick reply and update Brett Stokes!
... View more
10-28-2020
06:01 AM
|
0
|
0
|
858
|
POST
|
Hi Ismael Chivite - I'm having the exact same issue and its still occurring in 3.11. Did this not make it into that update? Will this be in the 3.12 update? Thanks!
... View more
10-27-2020
05:35 PM
|
0
|
2
|
858
|
IDEA
|
Hi Thomas, Thank you for the suggestion. I am aware that a map service can be used for some use cases. Unless I am missing something, I believe that any additional configuration of the map service layer (pop-ups, filters, etc.) are only saved in the web map in which it is being used. If I use a feature service, I am able to save the layer configuration at the item level. This allows many users to grab the feature layer item and add it to a map and it will already be configured in the Portal environment. If this is incorrect, please let me know. I also know that the feature service needs to be shared with the same permissions as the underlying map service. So I am unsure if this could cause issues where I want the underlying map service to have a different level of security than the feature service. But to echo some of the other comments, I think there is value in this process being more simplistic and easy for users that do not have a ton of in-depth enterprise GIS knowledge.
... View more
04-04-2019
12:42 PM
|
1
|
0
|
1659
|
IDEA
|
Hi Hilary, We presently do a lot of work with Collector. For this workflow we are publishing federated feature services into our portal that reference our enterprise geodatabase and are editable. If I want to then provide a read-only service of the same data, I need to then publish a second service of the same data so that I can share it more broadly without fear of it being edited accidentally. This consumes additional resources on our ArcGIS Server that could be used for more editable services. We are also starting to perform a similar workflow with more and more WebApp Builder web applications. We have 5 servers federated and are trying to use one for all of our hosted services and one for all of our federated services that reference registered data to help balance the load. If this cannot be done via a federated service, I’d love to see something similar to the collaboration functionality, where you identify a “parent” federated service that references our enterprise geodatabase. And then on some predetermined schedule (daily, weekly, etc.) a hosted service is generated or updated. This would allow for different views of the same data but reduce the amount of server overhead to provide them since they would be hosted and could scale better. This would still preserve that connection to our enterprise geodatabase so that we can be certain all of our data remains up to date and we do not need to republish hosted data via a scripting or manual process. Many of our users are comfortable managing and dealing with hosted data. Once you introduce the server and enterprise geodatabase portions we are mostly only allowing GIS staff to publish those types of services given the nuances and complexities of doing so. I hope this provides the context you are looking for. Thanks!
... View more
04-02-2019
07:01 AM
|
1
|
1
|
4950
|
POST
|
Has anyone attempted to use the application configuration options in AirWatch (or any MDM) with the new Collector release? We've successfully used the portalURL configuration key for Collector Classic, Explorer and Workforce so that the portal URL is preloaded for the end user. When doing the same with the new Collector, it appears to be attempting to reach the ArcGIS Portal Directory (e.g. https://webadaptorhost.domain.com/webadaptorname/sharing/rest) rather than the sign in screen. Please see the attached screen shots showing the error in Collector and how we have things configured in AirWatch. We have configured this in the exact same manner with no issues for all of the other Esri apps that support this type of configuration key, so this seems like it may be a bug with the new Collector. Jeff Shaner Kylie Donia
... View more
01-15-2019
11:49 AM
|
0
|
5
|
1952
|
IDEA
|
I would find this functionality to be very useful as well. This would prevent the need to publish many feature services on the ArcGIS Server just to have different views of the same data. Perhaps the views could be hosted feature services that are regularly updated based on the parent feature service that comes from the server and references registered data.
... View more
05-31-2018
08:03 AM
|
2
|
0
|
4950
|
POST
|
Sounds great! Thanks for the update Craig. I'll reach out once the update is available.
... View more
08-24-2017
05:36 AM
|
0
|
0
|
820
|
POST
|
Hi Craig, Any news or updates on this upcoming feature to pass values from Workforce into Survey123? Count me in as another person that would like the ability to pass the GlobalID value into Survey123 as well. We are not using a work order ID for our project but would still like the ability to maintain relationships through a unique ID such as a GlobalID. Thanks for your consideration!
... View more
08-21-2017
10:21 AM
|
0
|
4
|
820
|
POST
|
I recently updated to Pro 1.3 and now the table to excel tool is no longer working properly for me. If I try and run the tool using a feature class I receive the error in the attached screenshot. If I export the feature class table to a file geodatabase as a table and then run the tool it will execute. Has anyone else seen this behavior?
... View more
07-20-2016
01:01 PM
|
0
|
0
|
1010
|
POST
|
Hi Jacqueline, Thanks for taking the time to post a response. This is most helpful but I also find this to be more of an unexpected behavior and not a bug, but I'm not the one designing the software! Hopefully we can get Esri to see the light and make this change. Thanks again, Justin
... View more
05-05-2015
07:37 AM
|
0
|
0
|
1628
|
POST
|
Hi Jacqueline, I've seen the same problem in my own testing. If I use subtypes with a feature class and include some default values within the subtype then those are translated into Collector. If I use subtypes in a related table and use default values within the subtypes then those are not translated into Collector. My testing seems to show that default values within a subtype only work with feature classes and not with tables. To make things more complicated when I download a file geodatabase of my dataset then anything that used a subtype has that information removed and any domains that were used only within a subtype have also been removed. Any domains that were applied to a field in general are still there however. Odd behavior for sure.
... View more
04-16-2015
07:24 AM
|
3
|
6
|
1628
|
POST
|
Thanks for the feedback Brian. Did you happen to try anything more complex yet, similar to what I described above?
... View more
03-03-2015
09:17 AM
|
0
|
2
|
411
|
POST
|
Has anyone tried a data model similar to this in the new 10.3 update and been able to use it successfully? I'm using the Hydrant example from the blog post on the new related table functionality. I’m trying to create the following relationship model... (Hydrants > Inspections > Violations) (Hydrants > Inspections > Different Table) (Hydrants > Inspections > 3rd Related Table) I’m sticking to the 3 layers deep approach but I have 3 different related tables to the Inspections table. Has anyone tried this approach? Alternatively has anyone tried any approach like the following: (Feature > Table A > Table D) (Feature > Table B > Table D) (Feature > Table C > Table D) I'd like a good understanding of what is possible if anyone has tried these more complex relationships. Thanks in advance!
... View more
02-27-2015
12:59 PM
|
2
|
4
|
4169
|
POST
|
Hi, I was wondering if someone from the Collector development team could answer a specific question for me. For the upcoming offline support, when one selects the area to download onto the device what is the average amount of storage space the locally cached data is occupying? And as a follow up, what is the largest amount of data you've been able to download? I ask because I am about to purchase some iPads and as you know the amount of data storage capacity cannot be increased at a later time. I am planning to just purchase a 16GB model as the device will only be used for mobile GIS but if there is the potential for the offline data that is stored to be quite large, I'd like to have the additional capacity from the start rather than wishing I'd purchased a larger model after the fact. Thank you.
... View more
01-24-2014
09:28 AM
|
0
|
0
|
2241
|
Title | Kudos | Posted |
---|---|---|
2 | 05-31-2018 08:03 AM | |
1 | 04-04-2019 12:42 PM | |
1 | 04-02-2019 07:01 AM | |
2 | 02-27-2015 12:59 PM | |
3 | 04-16-2015 07:24 AM |
Online Status |
Offline
|
Date Last Visited |
01-20-2023
05:22 PM
|