Starting to get really frustrated with how long features are taking to develop. We only have 55 users, but with the developer pack, it should easily cover the wage of a developer. And given the amount of bugs appearing, they need more people.

Seems like Sandbox testing is an unknown quantity.....

We find that all “lines” we want we make a drawing of on the map (using MBTiles) and then we use Fulcrum to gather information about a “point” on that line. We never really capture information about the “entire” line. For example and town’s levee bank which is a line many kilometres long. Or if we want to describe a section of that “line” (I.e. type of levee, height etc.) we just create a point along that line to do that. Any report we generate we always seem to draw the levee on one page and have a table of observations on another page.

We don’t need to have the “start / end” point co-ordinates WITH the data. However, in saying that, there are a few people in our organisation (who are ESRI GIS users) who are “used to thinking” it’s needed (essential?), but in reality, it’s (most often) not.

And maybe a simple solution for Fulcrum to develop is to have a separate Child Database containing the drawing “co-ordinates” associated with each record.

Paul Wheeler - "If we had the ability to use lines and polygons, we would replace ArcGis and overall company usage would expand significantly"

Same request from me too.

You show how to capture a line using CURRENTLOCATION() in your Data Events/Examples/Capturing vector coordinates example.

It would be a great idea to be able to display this information (Maybe using SETPOINTLOCATION()?) when revisiting the site.

Are there any updates on this functionality? Like many of the commenters state below, this remains the biggest hurdle for getting more widespread adoption of Fulcrum in our organization and the larger environmental community.

Honestly as a shortcut if lines and polygons will take longer to develop, allow a single form to have multiple points. All lines and polygons are just made up of vertices and even if its on the back end, linking all the points to one RECORDID would allow for a lot more workflows with more complex geometry. I see it working like Repeatable sections, just with the location pins.

In evaluating software/apps that accommodate creating ecological records effectively, most frustratingly the first article I identified was that without the ability to generate polygons and lines, Fulcrum instantly forfeited any further consideration. That it is not included, a huge oversight whether your discussing market share or the end user. That this feature request is so highly placed, case in point. In continuing to evaluate apps within this category, and in doing trials in the field, I have though recognised some additional considerations. Only a couple of similar providers support poly/lines, but yes do so as if it is a given. Ry has not stated why, but if part of his rational behind leaving poly/line work to the desktop is accuracy, and you are talking areas less than 200 square m/yards, then point taken. With a current accuracy of around 5m for most hand held devices, in tests, I regularly dropped pins/points that created a meaningless shape for small areas, Fulcrum, far from the worst. At the very least you would need the location recalculated every second or so, position averaging and an accuracy setting included - as several other apps do include. From a practical aspect, yesterday I attempted to record 40 different sites with up to 200 plants at several of those locations. Obviously I cannot create 200 records per/location, however it is critical that I do record the boundaries of the plant distribution at each site. Which I could do by using a repeatable field to drop perimeter pins, other than the limitation of not being able to map view parent and child pins at the same time, invalidates that idea. That Fulcrum suggests they are reviewing "GPS effort tracklines", but not this requests, is confusing to me, the functionality, surely the same?? In consideration, I ponder if some of the current shortfall is the residing roadblock between Parent/child records as far as viewing, calculations and linking, supporting pins with a different symbol, removing one layer of save in repeatables so that you can create a series of child records rather than one at a time, and saving filtered views/searches on the mobile, where this even more valid than in the office. Annotating an image does have some potential as a work around, other than there is a suggestion of only 100 records for a repeatable, particularly with images included, and you would need directional orientation of the image. Under review, what may work as an alternative for myself and others, would be to be able to Annotate immediately on the base map or layer, this would be very quick, remove the need for a repeatable, and be viewable for each record. Sorry for the wordiness.