I'm trying to do something akin to this:
Criteria A = ([attribute1]<=0)
Criteria B = COMPARE("[attribute2]","True","")
Place cell "Alpha" for Criteria A
Place cell "Beta" for Criteria B
...Knowing that the two aren't mutually exclusive (e.g., if Criteria A and B are true, cells "Alpha" and "Beta" should both be placed).
The response I've seen is the following: 1) If Criteria A and Criteria B are both true, only cell "Alpha" is placed. 2) If Criteria A is false and Criteria B is true (Criteria B is always true), then only cell "Beta" is placed. I've tried to implement this scenario in a couple of different places in my schema, and each produces this same response.
Any idea why this is? I'm happy to supply a less abstract example (as well as my schema, shapefile and cell library) if that helps.
TIA.
Janice
Hi. I don't think this is possible, at least not the way you want it to work. You start with a feature instance that has a single geometry so that's what Bentley Map sees. It will not add additional feature instances nor will it duplicate geometries. The criteria are used to decide which symbology attributes to apply to that single instance. They are just symbology attributes, nothing more. For each attribute type (color, lineweight, cell, etc) the rules are evaluated in order. The first one that is true wins. This allows creation of multiple rules that can evaluate to true for the same instance and lets you order them in priority.
If you want a different cell to apply when both conditions are true you could create a criteria that tests both conditions and assign a new cell to that combination. That new cell could contain both of the other cells I suppose so on screen you would have the combination of both graphics. That new combination would be placed on a single point though, the point of the feature instance.
Hope this helps,.
Martin
Thanks for explaining the logic behind this scenario. Everything you said makes sense. Just one clarification - the symbology rules are evaluated in the sequential order based on their hierarchy in the schema .xml file, correct? (The hierarchy of criteria in the .xml file, referenced by the symbology rules, should not matter.)
Based on the information you gave in this and the other post, I'm planning to do exactly as you suggested. Unfortunately, this requires re-writing a TON of criteria, as well as generating an entire new cell library. (Fortunately, at least, it should work, which is better than what I have now.) I'd better get to work..