Import Tree Survey Tool - Extra Fields

[lisagravy]

I know there are a couple of extra fields that can be set for data when importing a tree survey using the import survey function. 

 

However I've got a really extensive survey, and would like to add some additional fields. Is this possible at the moment, or is this a wishlist feature?! 

[Katarina Ollikainen]

@lisagravy, at the moment, you have 10 extra fields - how many do you need? We might be able to help with something.

This is a thing feature will be extended, I just can't tell you exactly when.

[lisagravy]

Hi @Katarina Ollikainen - it's four extra fields at the moment really, Field 7, Field 8, Field 9, Field 10. Though I appreciate that some others could be re-allocated despite their name! 

 

I've got a tree survey with 32 fields in, and I just hate omitting data! 

 

It would also be good if we were able to re-name the existing fields, particularly if we are 're-allocating' their content. 

 

I want to use the output as part of an online ESRI Storymap... keen to try out the 'direct from Vectorworks' binding functionality on a live project! But as the client / public will be able to query the data, we'd need to be able to have field names which accurately represent the data content.

[Katarina Ollikainen]

@lisagravy, ok, let me see what I can do. I'll come back at the beginning of next week.

[lisagravy]

@Katarina Ollikainen Thank you ❤️

[Jeff Prince]

@lisagravy have you tried creating a custom record and attaching that to your existing tree objects?  I have not tried that with connecting to GIS, but it might be worth testing and a possible solution.

[Katarina Ollikainen]

@jeff prince - The crux (as I see it) is that you must have the fields inside the tool for the data to land on when performing the Existing tree import, instead of adding the info manually - there's no geometry to attach the record to as the trees are created at the import. It's the chicken and egg scenario 😁.

 

Otherwise, the attached record is perfect.

[Jeff Prince]

40 minutes ago, Katarina Ollikainen said:

@jeff prince - The crux (as I see it) is that you must have the fields inside the tool for the data to land on when performing the Existing tree import, instead of adding the info manually - there's no geometry to attach the record to as the trees are created at the import. It's the chicken and egg scenario 😁.

 

Otherwise, the attached record is perfect.

 

Couldn't that be scripted by using the tree id number as an identifier of the object and then mapping the data from the tree report to the custom record?

What about connecting to the tree inventory as an outside database to populate records?

I don't know how to that, but it seems like something a computer should be able to do 🙂

 

[Katarina Ollikainen]

Hi, my brain must have been on holiday already when responding to this post - the solution is so obvious.

As long as the 'Add to Record' is checked, the data will go into the record attached to the tree object.

You don't have to do anything fancy; it just works.

The only thing is that it's not visible in the Shape pane in the Object Info Palette but in the Data pane.

[Katarina Ollikainen]

Hi, my brain must have been on holiday already when responding to this post - the solution is so obvious.

As long as the 'Add to Record' is checked, the data will go into the record attached to the tree object.

You don't have to do anything fancy; it just works.

The only thing is that it's not visible in the Shape pane in the Object Info Palette but in the Data pane.