COMPAREFAT
compares the
Feature Attribute Tables (FATs) from multiple coverages and reports differences
in an output file. These differences can then be eliminated using
MATCHFAT.
____________________________________________________________________________
COMPAREFAT
<out_file> <feature_class...feature_class | template_cover | ALL>
{-LIST <cover_list>}
ARGUMENTS
<out_file>
- the name for the output report file.
<feature_class...feature_class>
- the set of FATs to be compared.
The
possibilities are POLYGON, POINT, ARC, LINE, NODE, ANNOTATION.subclass,
SECTION.subclass, ROUTE.subclass, and REGION.subclass. Abbreviations
are accepted.
<template_cover>
- the FATs in the specified coverage define the set of FATs to be
compared.
<ALL>
- all FATs which exist in any of the input coverages will be
compared.
{-LIST
<cover_list>} - specifies that a file named <cover_list>
contains a list of the coverages whose FATs are to be
compared.
In the
<cover_list> the coverages should be listed one per record. To
terminate the list a blank record or a record containing 'END' may be used, but
this is not necessary.
If no file is
provided, the user is prompted for the coverage names.
DIALOG
If {-LIST
<cover_list>} is not supplied, then COMPAREFAT holds a dialog with the
user to prompt for the input coverages to be compared. The dialog is
similar to that used by ARC MAPJOIN, except that with COMPAREFAT you can use
wildcards. In other words, if you wish to compare all coverages in
the current workspace whose names begin with 'VEG', than enter 'VEG*' at the
'Enter coverage' prompt.
NOTES
- COMPAREFAT
runs from any module of ARC/INFO, ver. 8.0.1.
DISCUSSION
PURPOSE - The
purpose of COMPAREFAT is to compare the feature classes of different
coverages. This can come in handy because some commands, such as ARC
MAPJOIN, require that the feature classes being joined exist in all input
coverages and have similar FATs. The output report created by
COMPAREFAT can be run through MATCHFAT to actually eliminate the
differences.
OUTPUT REPORT -
COMPAREFAT reports 4 types of differences: missing feature classes, missing
items, differently defined items, and out-of-order items.
MISSING FEATURE
CLASSES - For each FAT missing from a coverage, a line is written to the output
report. For example:
Coverage:
VEG01, Feature_Class: ARC, Problem: MISSING
MISSING ITEMS -
For each item missing from an FAT, a line is written to the
report. For example:
Coverage:
VEG01, Feature_Class: ARC, Item: CFF-CODE1, Problem: MISSING, Definition:
'3,3,C,0'
Only
non-mandatory items are considered. For example, for the POLYGON
feature class, the AREA, PERIMETER, <cover>#, and <cover>-ID items
are not considered.
DIFFERENTLY
DEFINED ITEMS - For each item that exists but has a different definition, a line
is written to the report. For example:
Coverage:
VEG01, Feature_Class: POLYGON, Item: WSHED, Problem: DEFINITION, Definition:
'10,10,C,0'
Items are
compared by first recording all the items (not including the mandatory items)
belonging to each FAT that occur in any of the input coverages. A
definition is recorded for each item, e.g. '10,10,C,0' in the above
example. The definition is taken from the first coverage input that
contains that item. Therefore, if you have standard coverage to which
you wish to compare other coverages, then enter the standard coverage name
first.
OUT-OF-ORDER
ITEMS - For each FAT whose items are out-of-order, a line is written to the
report. For example:
Coverage:
VEG01, Feature_Class: POLYGON, Problem: ITEM_ORDER, Order: 'WSHED
DATA'
The "correct"
item order is determined by the order in which the items are first encountered
in the input coverages.