Create/Edit Related features
I have a test 3.15 Essentials site with a 1.3 HTML5 viewer. I have a Sites featureclass and a Visits table. I defined a relationship class (one-to-many) between Sites(1) and Visits(m). The data and relationship class is in SDE. The objects are related by a 50 char. string field on both objects (for testing). I have the table present in the mxd and resultant service. I am connecting as data owner. I have added the relationship in Rest manager. In the viewer I can edit the sites featureclass and see the related records (created in desktop).
/customer/servlet/servlet.FileDownload?file=00P6000000eluL7EAI
When I edit the polygon feature in the viewer, there is the option to add related features:
/customer/servlet/servlet.FileDownload?file=00P6000000elts0EAA
Clicking the add button doesn't seem to do anything. Nothing reported in the logs, or in fiddler. Has anyone seen this feature working? Any make suggestions on what to check based on the above?
Thanks.
-
James,
I have this working as a quick test site. I have a one to one type relationship class set up between my point feature layer and another table. When I click the create button (black button with a white plus), I'm presented with a data entry form to input data to the new related record. See attachment.
/customer/servlet/servlet.FileDownload?file=00P6000000eltvYEAQ
I had to monkey around with the proxy page a bit to get this working. If you have that done, I'm not sure why it's not working.
I do have a question\problem related to this. As I said, I can create a new related record, but I dont see any way to edit the attributes of an existing related record or to delete an existing related record. Are these actions supposed to be supported? If so, how? If not, it seems like a very useful feature to add. Appreciate any info on this.
Thanks
0 -
Has anybody found the solution to this? I have a couple of sites that have some custom Silverlight code that allows for the editing of related tables. When I create a new HTML5 viewer (both 1.3.1 and 2.0) I can see the related data when I identify it. It will not show the related records or do anything when you click on the create new related record.
Thoughts?
0 -
We've moved focus to our internal SL viewer so I haven't revisited this yet -and doing so is likely to still be a couple of months away. I'm interested in your custom code for the SL viewer though, is it something you're willing/able to share?
Thanks,
James
0 -
Create appear to work fine in GE 4.7 with GVH 2.8. I couldn’t figure out if the Edit is applicable
_img_ alt="User-added image" src="https://latitudegeo--c.na53.content.force.com/servlet/rtaImage?eid=90760000000ChXQ&feoid=Body&refid=0EM600000001SX1" _/_img_
_img_ alt="User-added image" src="https://latitudegeo--c.na53.content.force.com/servlet/rtaImage?eid=90760000000ChXQ&feoid=Body&refid=0EM600000001SX6" _/_img_0 -
Hi,
We have a similar problem with related feature class. No problem if related feature is a table; however, we cannot create a related feature if related feature is a point (in our case).
Clicking on the + create a new related feature doesn't seem to do anything. Does anyone experience something similar?
We are using GE Manager 4.6.3.24 and HTML5 viewer 2.6.1
Thanks,
Chen-Ting0 -
@ Jamal, are any of your fields on that service editable?
@ Chen-Ting
Have you added all your feature service layers and any related tables to the Essentials site?
This is a known issue we hope to have a partial fix in place for the 2.8.1 release and a full fix in place in the 2.9 release.
Thanks,
Mike Ketler0 -
This is to confirm that search, create and editing is supported in GE4.7\GVH2.8 for tables that are associated to features with relationship class.
_img_ alt="User-added image" src="https://latitudegeo--c.na53.content.force.com/servlet/rtaImage?eid=90760000000Gren&feoid=Body&refid=0EM60000000Ujms" _/_img_
_img_ alt="User-added image" src="https://latitudegeo--c.na53.content.force.com/servlet/rtaImage?eid=90760000000Gren&feoid=Body&refid=0EM60000000Ujmx" _/_img_0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
7 comments