Hi Anglea, Not without doing a little more work. What you're doing is converting three Feature Types into one because Shape isn't as flexible as Smallworld at organising its data.
To explain why this happens... As I understand it the Smallworld interface passes FME a list of Feature Types and during translation the features themselves. In the original implementation the interface passed us the name as the tablename, but it passed us the features as tablename+mapping. So the workspace was showing 'meter' but the features were labelled meter-proposed, meter-existing and meter-abandoned. Therefore the unexpected input remover threw everything away. I think GE's fix was to pass us the names as tablename+mapping. So now you would get three Feature Types in a workspace, meter-proposed, meter-existing and meter-abandoned - the features would match and all is OK. Except for the fact that you end up with three separate outputs. I don't believe there is a way to change this behaviour in the interface/reader, so it will be difficult to do in an automated translation/mapping file. In Workbench what you'll just have to do is make a note of where mapped geometries are expected and manually connect them to the same output Feature Type - ie delete two of the three existing connections in the workspace then drag a connection from the two unconnected sources to the already connected destination (which you can rename from meter-proposed to simply meter). Does this make sense - this way you'd get one Shape Dataset instead of three. You may also want to turn 'proposed', 'existing' and 'abandoned' into an attribute (if it isn't already) so you can tell the meters apart in the single output. Hope this helps to explain things, Regards, Mark Mark Ireland, Product Support Engineer Safe Software Inc. Surrey, BC, CANADA [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.safe.com Solutions for Spatial Data Translation, Distribution and Access --- In [email protected], Angela Deegan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi there, > > When we export Smallworld objects with mapped geometries to shape file format, we get a separate shape file for each mapping. These then have to be merged by our customer. We would like for them to export as one file which retains all the geometries. Anyone know how to do this? > > For example, we have a meter table which has a LOCATION geometry field which is mapped from a STATUS field. The STATUS field has an enumerated list with three possible values ("Proposed", "Existing" and "To be Abandoned"). So, when we export objects from this table we get three files - one for each of the STATUS values. > > Angela Deegan > 619 667 6245 > > > --------------------------------- > Yahoo! Mail > Bring photos to life! New PhotoMail makes sharing a breeze. > Get the maximum benefit from your FME, FME Objects, or SpatialDirect via our Professional Services team. Visit www.safe.com/services for details. Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fme/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
