jan15

Or you could create a text entity, perhaps consisting of just a hyphen, and set its horizontal and vertical alignment to "center", and then rectangular-array it, perhaps inside a group. Then use the Text tool to change each hyphen to the data for that box. That makes a very neat table that's easy to control. For example, adjust column width by grabbing whole columns and moving them over.

What I find (all VW versions on Windows machines) is that while inside a Group I can't snap to any objects on other layers, but can snap to all objects on the current layer, regardless of location.

No, you don't need to buy a PC, and you don't need to export WindowsMetaFile format. I always export DWG format, not DXF. Maybe the Mac won't add the filename extensions that Windows needs in order to open files, and so you'll have to do that yourself: add .dwg for AutoCad files, and .mcd for VectorWorks if you send that. With version 8 you can only export to AutoCad 14, which doesn't handle multiple sheets in a single file, so you should export each sheet as a separate file. Even with newer versions I would do that to avoid confusion. Also, Acad 14 doesn't have lineweight, except for polylines, so that's not going to come through unless you draw everything with polylines. No version of AutoCad has scale, and various problems can arise trying to export a scale drawing to it. For trouble-free export I suggest changing the scale of all your layers to full size (in a temporary file), and exporting that. AutoCad likes to have everything full size, and it creates "Viewports" -- holes that it cuts in the 24" x 36" "Paperspace" to look through it into the full-size world of "Modelspace", where it likes to have everything drawn, zooming in or out inside that hole to create an illusion of scale. Any Autocad user can do that very quickly. Note also that the VW default is to export Classes as AutoCad "Layers" (since that's the nearest equivalent; AutoCad doesn't have real layering), but if you want instead to export Layers as "Layers" there's an option in the Export Options window. And of course you need to give them any non-standard fonts you used (any fonts that they don't already have installed), or their system will substitute another font which won't fit in the spaces you alloted. I've never had any trouble exporting from VW 8, using the above procedures. However, version 10 may have an advantage for you in that you can give your consultants the free VectorWorks Viewer (which only reads version 9 or 10 files), and then you can send them the VW file along with the DWG file (the real file, not the full-size one you exported from), so they can see what the drawing would look like if they had a good Cad program. If you used more than one scale on a sheet, and if they want to arrange the sheet just as you did, they'd need either a printout or the Viewer to see how you did it. And the upgrade from 8 to 9 is not very expensive.

They still sell the 1520, you know. And I'm pretty sure Epson makes at least one other wide-carriage, a newer model that takes the newer patentable ink cartridges, with a microchip built in so that Brand-X can't make cartridges for them. My memory is that the 1520, and also all other Epson wide-carriage printers, allows A2 paper to pass through the machine, but only prints on the same print area as for 13" x 19" paper. Is that what yours does? My Epson 1160 does that. The 1160 was a cheaper cousin to the 1520, and it isn't made any more, but I'm very glad I have it rather than the HP 1220c that we have at the office, which has many software problems and also doesn't come close to matching screen colors, and broke irreparably after 2 years of use.

Isn't there also some way to embed word processor files in VectorWorks? I've never tried it, but I remember several years ago seeing someone else do it. He needed to fill a sheet with specifications, and rather than try to format the text in MiniCad, and try to figure out how tall the column of text really would print, he typed it all in a word processing file (I think it was Wordperfect, actually) and then placed it on the drawing sheet with tabs and everything and with a clearly indicated size that didn't change as you zoomed in and out. I wish now that I had asked how he did it.

Thinking about the issues raised here has made me notice something else about deselecting: Whereas in version 8 a click on empty space deselects all objects AND ALSO changes to the Select tool, in version 10 it only deselects all objects. The active tool remains active. To also change to the Select tool, you have to double-click on empty space. So now it's more convenient to deselect by clicking. And it would be especially easy to deselect the object just drawn, just by adding one more click. It just has to become a habit. Tasfire is obviously aware of that, but maybe other experienced users have, like me, not noticed this change before?

For evaluation of exports, I use the free Autodesk Express Viewer. Can you return LT? For printing or on-screen WYSIWYG viewing, the free VectorWorks Viewer works great and is easy to use, even includes Print Scaling and the Move Page tool in case they want to print at reduced size or print only part of a sheet. And it includes the Sheet selection menu, of course. The only thing is that all the fonts you used have to be present on the machine that reads the file (which I think is also true of Acrobat files), and that chauvinistic or habitually befuddled AutoCad users sometimes exhibit some resistance to downloading the Viewer. For exporting DWG's with no glitch, you could Save As and set all layers to full size before exporting. That gives AutoCad what it likes, i.e. everything full size in "Model Space", no scale. Your correspondents can make whatever Viewports they need to create the illusion of scale and to locate individual drawings on a sheet, as they have to do with everything they draw. They would only need to create one Viewport for each scale you used in the file. It would only take them a few minutes to do it. You can send them the VectorWorks file and the Viewer along with it to show them how to arrange the sheet, if that's what they want. If they just want individual drawings for inclusion in their own sheets, then this method gives them a better starting point.

I would like to see this also, if it's not too much trouble to implement. Or, alternatively, is there a way that the selected mode can remain selected after the program shuts down, as with Preferences, so that we don't have to reset the modes each time we re-boot? As a workaround, I use a startup macro to set all the tools to the mode I use most often. But it's not very satisfactory, since I don't always remember to run the macro, particularly when I re-boot in the middle of the day to shake off a technical glitch. I always suspected that this problem caused the demise of the Extend tool. The default mode for Extend required the user to drag the extendee to the boundary, which made it a useless tool, doing hardly more than the Select tool can do. It's only if one tried out the second mode that the tremendous value of the Extend tool became apparent, allowing extension of an object by a single click to even an off-screen boundary, such as the far end of a long, thin surface object.

quote: Originally posted by krw: ... In the workspace editor, in vw 9.5, if a shortcut is already being used vw tells me which comand is using the shortcut. VW 10 does not do this. It just says the shortcut is unavailable. ... That sounds familiar. I remember having that problem. Could it be an early release of version 10 that didn't identify the tool that already uses the shortcut? All I can say for sure is that version 10.1.0 on Windows 2000 doesn't have the problem.

I agree that color and thickness attributes transferred by the eyedropper should be "Class" (if that is the source's attribute), rather than just the current class color or thickness for that class. That seems more natural to me. But I strongly disagree about eyedropping layer. It's important to be able to eyedrop color and thickness without changing an object's layer. If there is an eyedropper that transfers Layer assignment, it should be a separate tool. In fact, I think someone has posted a script for a tool like that at Vector Depot.

A lot of fonts make character number 176 the degree symbol. On a PC, hold down the Alt key while typing "0176" on the numeric keypad, and when you release Alt the degree symbol should appear.

And when you get used to it you'll be glad it does work that way. You often want to duplicate, array, rotate, move, or change color or lineweight/type of the object you just created, so it's very convenient that the object is still selected.

We've had the same problem as other people have described in this thread, with VW 9 and 10 (but not 8), printing from Windows 2000-Pro to a DesignJet 500-PS. Only occaisional files fail to print, and usually only a certain sheet within each file. Once a file fails to print, no file will print until VectorWorks is shut down and re-started. When a file doesn't print, I print small areas of the problem sheet, perhaps with certain layers invisible, until I find an area/layer combination that won't print. Then I experiment with that area until I've isolated a "problem" object which won't print even if it's the only thing showing, and I delete and redraw that object. Thereafter, the whole sheet prints with no problem. The things that I've changed to get the sheet to print have been varied, and make no sense to me, but I'll report those which I can remember in case it helps with the debugging: --Once it was a nested symbol, and I solved it by exploding the inner symbol (but other nested symbols have had no problem). --Several times it was a pattern-filled circle inside a symbol, and I solved it by changing to a solid grey fill (but I think other pattern-filled circles have had no problem). --Twice it was a distorted curved object inside a symbol (either an arc or a polyline, I can't remember, and it looked on-screen as if it had melted and been re-shaped). It only looked distorted at a certain rotation angle. I solved it by rotating the problem iteration to a different angle, after which it looked right on-screen and printed with no problem. (I once had a similar problem in version 8, in which the file printed, but with the "problem" curve looking melted and reshaped only on printout.) --Once it was a small piece of solid white-filled polyline. It didn't look distorted, but didn't seem to respond to some tool actions. I finally was able to select it and delete it, and then I re-drew it exactly the same. --Once I divided a large and complicated solid grey-filled polyline into 2 pieces (with hidden edges where they meet). This was actually a different case: the file printed, but on the print-out the fill was distorted, going outside the edges, until I made that change. (Larger and more complicated solid-filled polylines have printed with no problem.)

I've just discovered, via another thread, that the Workspace Editor in version 10 allows the user to select what's in the Context (right-click pop-up) Menus. Under the "Menus" tab. So you can add "Deselect All", if it's not already there, or any other Menu Command, to the Context Menus. That's nice.

Mbuck, The problems you detailed are not with Classes, but with plug-ins. I agree with you there. I often find fault with some detail of how a plug-in or any more automated tool works, and I usually end up not using them. I don't complain about them because I think the kind of flaws I find are necessarily part of any automated tool. Either I use them and accept the slight loss of control, or I do the work myself, perhaps taking more time, but getting the exact desired result. Since this thread is entitled "Philosophy...", I'll close with a popular quote from philosopher Ananda Coomaraswamy: "The craftsman himself can always, if allowed to, draw the delicate distinction between the machine and the tool. The carpet loom is a tool, a contrivance for holding warp threads at a stretch for the pile to be woven round them by the craftsman's fingers; but the power loom is a machine, and its significance as a destroyer of culture lies in the fact that it does the essentially human part of the work".

P Retondo, you're right on both points. I missed your comment about "en masse" assignment of Attributes. I assume you mean that would be done the same way as it's done now, except that the Attributes thus assigned would be associated only with the members of the Group, not with the Group itself. It does seem illogical for a Group to have Attributes other than those of its members. I suppose if a Group with uniform Attributes is selected, those could show on the Attributes palette, and if a Group with varied Attributes is selected, the Attributes palette could show blanks for any Attribute that isn't uniform.

quote: Originally posted by Henry Finch: ... It is usually hard to drag one object to another objects corner. ... Oddly enough, I found this problem with version 10.0.0, but found that it's gone in 10.1.0 (on a Windows machine). The problem, as I finally figured out, was that I would get the screen hint and cursor type for grabbing a corner at times when I wasn't really poised to grab a corner. So when I grabbed that non-corner point and dragged it to another object's corner, the result was the corners not coinciding. But as I said, it's cleared up in version 10.1.0

quote: Originally posted by Mbuck: ... at odds with NNA stated aim to make VW operation and user interface simple, clean, and intuitive. ... There's nothing about Classes that's inconsistent with that aim. As always, the aim is accomplished by providing a clear and consistent logic, with a quick, graphically-oriented user interface which presents a wide range of options using very little screen space. A user can ignore the wide range of options, or can delve into them and make a drawing file as complex as he/she wishes. You can use VectorWorks for years without knowing what a Class is, or you can use Classes in any number of ways to create a complex drawing file with powerful control features. As with any powerful system, there's also the ability to hang yourself, but that's not a fault of the software.

quote: Originally posted by Mbuck: ... one of the most unique software concepts extant within Vectorworks is the ?class?. ... The VectorWorks Class is in concept very similar to what AutoCad misleadingly calls "Layer". It has a much better interface than AutoCad Layers, but as a concept, it's actually one of the least unique aspects of VectorWorks.

quote: Originally posted by P Retondo: ... and do not allow container objects to have graphic attributes. ... This would disable an important feature of Groups, which is the ability to assign an Attribute to all the members of the group with a single click. If this feature were disabled, Attribute sharing could only be done with the much more cumbersome procedure of creating, naming, and editing a Class, which also means adding yet another Class to the pull-down list, another Class that has to be arranged on Sheets, etc. Generally, the suggestions in this thread don't point to any fault in the internal logic of the program. They point to a user generating a system so complex that he/she can't control it. The solution is not to change to special safety rope that can't be used to tie knots or form nooses, it's to stop hanging yourself.

Dan, I would certainly prefer the ability to assign any key or combination to either a Tool or a Command, but I think Nemetschek is against it. To really work, the term "any key" would have to include Function keys. BG, Good point, and yet another VectorWorks feature I've overlooked. But on my Windows system, that works for VW8 (in fact, even if you right-click on an object), but not for VW10.

Thanks, Skidee. It does look like Regedit would work, though I haven't actually tried it yet. If it doesn't work it'll probably mean removing, purging and reinstalling. But it looks like the program file that normally opens all .MCD files is specified as the Data for this key: HKEY_CLASSES_ROOT\mcd_auto_file\shell\open\command Anyone at NNA want to confirm this? [ 04-19-2003, 01:00 AM: Message edited by: jan15 ]

I feel the same way as Carl and iboymatt. I've always designed using rough 2D and 3D sketches and precise 2D drawings, and I always spend more time on 2D construction drawings than on anything else. Recent improvements to VectorWorks haven't helped me as much as some other improvements would have, and the changes to introduce those improvements have been to the detriment of some of the features I liked best about it. I always keep the 3D model in my head, just as a habit, regardless of how I'm expressing it on paper or on a computer screen. When I make 3D models on a computer, it's mostly for showing to clients, who usually don't have that habit of 3D visualization. They like being able to walk around inside a model (if only for the futuristic thrill). But I can't afford to spend a lot of time on that. To save time, and also to maximize the show-and-tell benefit, I need to be able to edit the model while viewing it in 3D. One of the great things about MiniCad and VectorWorks 2D drawing has always been that ability to clearly see what you're working on while working on it, as easily as if working on paper. I can edit a VectorWorks drawing while discussing it with a client. To get that same facility in 3D modelling, I've had to use a different program, Sketchup. And after using VW 9 and 10 for a month each, I've gone back to VW 8 as the fastest 2D drawing program.

Dan, I think jrmerrier meant that Nemetschek should alter the program so that the Esc key deselects everything. But until then, you can do it yourself by using a macro utility, as discussed above.

Dimension lines and extension lines are treated the same as any other lines as far as constraint points are concerned. And the dimensioned point is not treated as a locus for snapping purposes; you can only snap to the dimensioned point if it's also a constraint point on an object (which it almost always is). I don't have that problem of confusion between the dimensioned point and the end of the extension line, but I use an increased distance to the start of the extension line (default is .0625, I made it .15). I think I originally did that several years ago because of the problem you're talking about.