Petri

Another juror vote for the plaintiff. EDIT Do we need 6 or 12 votes to find the defendant guilty?

Can you? Hey, this is great! Thank you, boxjoint!

I have posted instructions how to start to figure out what the problem is. I can't help you if you refuse to help yourself. No-one can. You can flush yourself down the toilet, as far as I'm concerned.

The other programs are wrong. Stupid. Anyone who would like VW to work this way is... well, never mind. Go and buy any of the other CAD programs! No. Nothing like it. A 3D view is not the same as 3D space. The x/y coordinates of 2D objects have no relationship whatsoever to the coordinate system of the 3D-space. ------- Right. Some people want an "option" to have 2D objects in 3D space. I have only bad news: this is not possible. Some want a stupid and totally pointless z=0 setting. ------- Yes, I am irritated.

Even better! So, you definitely have the need for a unique, unambiguous name. Just don't use the intended section names elsewhere. Simple. Now, what was the object type for your 2/A6.3?

No-one forces you to use them. The arrangement has very good reasons. Besides, as many Brothers and Sisters have Forcefully Witnessed, no-one in their right mind does 3D.

The concept (maybe even applicable code?) already exists in Viewports. The user interface could be similar to VPs. Perhaps some override settings should/could even be global (i) for all wall styles, (ii) for one wall style?

And how you would move a 2D object in 3D space? Assumptions in other programs may be stupid, you know!

Didn't we use to have a button that replaced all symbols? Now VW asks for each and every one - even with only 100 or so updated symbols, it is just a tiny bit tedious.

No, that's not the definition.

But you can't! The files either have surnames (extensions) or are in different folders (the folder path then being a surname). In VW you can have as many Daves as you want as long as they are in different files.

Well, I can't understand how the 2D geometry could know where it is supposed to be in 3D. 2D objects do not have 3D data because they are not 3D objects. Would it be useful if something drawn in plan would always be at z-level zero? I don't think so. But let's assume you draw something in front elevation. Where would that 2D something be along y-axis? Or in a perspective view? There is, BTW, a solution that is definitely not a workaround: draw everything in 3D...

They may seem to be, but a squashed circle is not the same as a conic section. Measuring this would be difficult because you can't establish where the foci would be if the oval would be an ellipse.

Semantics & etymology are indeed fun, but the VW "ellipse" is a "squashed circle", not "the set of all points (x, y) in the plane such that the sum of the distances from (x, y) to two fixed points (foci) is some constant." Why? Well, because neither Apple's nor Microsoft's graphics libraries use true ellipses.

Did you try changing layer scale to 1:1 before exporting? Or, hmm, 25.4...

In my generic utilities script collection (nearly 300 scripts & canned routines) - GetName: used in 33 - SetName: used in 13 - *name (wildcard + name) in 133 Of course there is repetition and maybe *name is not a perfectly valid query, but nevertheless. Outside scripting a typical example are room numbers: at least my Space object checks the uniqueness using the object name. Why can't we have object names, symbol names, class names etc separately? Well, perhaps we could - but since everything in VW is an object... About these viewports: I am promoting a naming convention that looks like this: PLAN-3rd floor-1:100 ELEVATION-East-1:200 Works very well in Organizer, especially Visibilities. Something like "2/A6.3" looks too impressive to my humble taste and mushy mind.

Tsk tsk. Layers have their own name space so it can't be a layer. To find out who the Offending Object is one can use VectorScript: Create a new VectorScript (yes, Palette-1 & Script-1 are fine names) and paste this in: MESSAGE(GETTYPE(GETOBJECT('2/A6.3'))); then say OK and double-click the script name in the palette. You may get a number.

Nah. One is enough: convert (a copy of) the 2D linework to 3D-polygons. Maybe put a floor there, too, for the overall site. Or a terrain model.

There are U.K. plants in the system already.

Yes, this is what all other ArchiCAD salesmen say, too, but never have been able to substantiate the claim. Oh yes, you guys give heaps of reasons, but they do not, conceptually, amount to much. Well, I'll skip Revit, we hatess Windowss... But I intend to do that with ArchiCAD - although what I have learned using it in demo mode does not really convince. It is impressive, no doubt. The user interface is especially impressively confusing and complicated. Maybe it is worth it, though - but it is approximately 15 years since I got so totally frustrated with ArchiCAD that I switched to MiniCAD. (And hey, I was even an ArchiCAD trainer & consultant part time!)

Not that the previous incarnation of the DTM module I used (9.5) would have been great, but at least one was able to have default settings and transfer those between files with classes. I can't find anything for this in VW 2008. No classes, no preferences, nothing. I want classes back! There are 24 graphics settings for the Site Model and more for Site Analysis. Is one expected to go through them every time? (The factory settings are dreadful!) Or am I exceptionally blind or thick, not seeing the obvious? Or not seeing the light, recognising Progress?

"10. Plant Database ? provide additional plant data and improve the interaction between VectorWorks and the plant database." Questions like this do not encourage one to reply. I don't want any more North American (or even South American) plants, but would want the database we were promised.

The polygon tool also uses the paint bucket... (The space planning tool belongs - surprisingly - to those that are awesomely useless in at least Finland.)

Polygons/polylines, possibly in classes, will do the job just as well. A worksheet will report them quite nicely - you don't have to shoot a squirrel with an elephant gun.

Everything is as designed and as it should be. Nothing is wrong. Hey, you must have a surname? (Or a first name: Dave Digitalmechanics or something?) Surely you realise that to distinguish you from all other Daves (or Digitalmechanicses), you need a unique name!