A configuration 'cookbook' for VSW layer list referencing existing capabilities of GE/GVH
Pinned Featured
Several folks have commented in this forum that the main thing keeping them from moving to VSW is the lack of functional equivalence in the layer list when moving from GE/GVH.
The good news is that there is functional equivalence. The bad news is that how to accomplish it is different enough from GE/GVH that folks were finding it hard to figure out.
In this linked PDF you'll find a complete description of the functionality, where you configure it, and some screens that visualize it to make it easier to find.
http://data.latitudegeo.com/Cam/layer-list-in-GXW.pdf
-
Great! Looks like some useful info here. Thanks.
0 -
@Zorba Conlen? Thanks Zorba. If you have any questions once you start working with this feel free to ask. I'll do my best to clarify anything I might have missed in the 'cookbook'.
0 -
@Cam Barnard? thank you for sharing this. Very useful!
0 -
Thanks Cam for putting together the tips. As you mentioned GXW is about "do more" than the out-of-box ESRI's web viewer, I really hope there's a way to create custom layer groups indecently from AGOL web map and organise the layers freely as how it does in GVH. ESRI's Web Viewer (Beta) doesn't support nested group layer, nor it has a clear road map whether it will support nested group layer in the future. The road map webpage of ESRI's Web Viewer (Beta) hasn't been updated for over a year.
0 -
Nested Group Layers are supported in the new Map Viewer per the last AGOL release.
0 -
Nice Ted Cronin I haven't played with that yet, I'll have to check it out.
0 -
Cam,
Are there plans for Visibility Filters on layers? I can get it to work by setting Failure Behavior to Silent but the console is full of errors because of it. The other option would be to make 3 webmaps and 3 Apps while other functions can be handled in just one app.
Hoop dat alles verder goed gaat daar.
Erik Kuipers
Esri Netherlands
0 -
@... Ja, alles goed, bedankt.
No specific plans to add visibility filters on layers, that feature is focused on showing / hiding UI elements.
I'd like to think through your use case.
You have a webmap with three layers. User A can see layer A, User B can see layer B, User C can see layer C (using Access Control?).
You have a webmap configured with all three layers in your app.
User A loads the app, but can't see layer B or layer C so would get errors (unless you set failure behavior to Silent).
You are looking for a pattern where this single webmap in a single app can be used for user A, user B, user C without any UI (or console) errors.
Is that an OK summary?
1 -
Cam,
That is spot on. In GVH we had to make 3 Viewers because it lacked the flexibility there, now in web we have this flexibility in Visibility Filters but we lack the possibility for Visibility Filters om layers.
We are not using Access Control (mapservice is served by ersi netherlands content) but use Feature Layers (url to specific layers) and grant access trough groups. And 1 mapservice with all layers for users who may use all layers. It has to do with GDPR. some users may see the social security numbers others may not. So we serve a mapservices as DAAS (Data As A Service) to customers. we serve only 1 mapservice. Group a may see entire mapservice (11 layers and 12 tables for relationship classes and stuff) Group B may see only 2 layers and 1 table. so we register 3 seperate items in portal and assingn these to Group B, there is even a Group C with more or less feature layers (add url and assign layerid with it).
0
Comments
9 comments