Petri

So it seems. It also provides unwanted data and cannot give the area in user-defined units. True to NNA's way of doing things, it thinks that the area unit in millimetres is "sq mm". Well, it is only 99% of the world that knows that it should be "mm2" - one of these millennia, this knowledge may even reach the shores (if any) of Maryland. Anyway, thanks for the reminder.

Very brief testing, but I get exactly the same volume from a wall with peaks and the mesh from "convert to a mesh".

Still not quite sure what you're after. A project-wide text that you could format differently for each sheet layer? A very simple parametric object would probably do the trick - the text edited through tool preferences only, hidden or disabled in the object info. (Just a theory. Do you have a VectorScript or CC+ -programmer available? Should only take a couple of hours or even less.)

I don't think the callout tool would solve your problem, not even with the database - this tool is quite idiosyncratic. All (dynamic) phrases will be preceded with a number. Formatting (alignment) does not seem to be possible. I may be wrong here - I've only spent a few days in trying to figure out how to use the tool...

Are you sure? If true, this is a major disaster... (Goes to do testing.)

1) With formula =AREA; for those working in mm and wanting areas in m2, =AREA/10^6. 2) No. There are (i) parametric objects that do it automatically and (ii) add-on programs that create non-dynamic area tags.

OK. Let's consider this once more. One detail per file (the AutoCAD 'block' way) is, in my opinion, a hugely inefficient and cumbersome approach. When you have tens of details in a file, you can't have a meaningful thumbnail. When you are (=were) restricted to 8-letter filenames, keyword-based management is quite attractive. Having the detail reference files as favourites in the Resource Browser gives you pretty easy access to symbols, but of course not to "non-symbols". However, you could have a worksheet in each file, with these keywords. If the name of the worksheet would be that of the file, you could import that and peruse it. Not exactly convenient, I agree. If one could open files with Resource Browser and/or reference worksheets, things would be a lot easier. Maybe you should consider switching the operating system: Spotlight does what you want (except the impossible thumbnails), searches all types of documents and is extremely fast - and always there. I just did a test. Put "good details" into the Spotlight comment field of file info of one of the approx. 40000 files on my hard disk. Did a Spotlight search (documents only) and in less than a second (read: instantaneously) I was given a list of 62 files either containing the words or having those in the said comments. I wonder if your AutoCAD add-on can beat this.

These are obviously "red" symbols. You should also change the automatic class of the PIO in question.

Not sure what is the problem with a symbol - that would seem to be the obvious solution.

I wonder... With viewports some sort of automatic reference maintenance should be technologically possible. Marker PIOs could keep track of the existence and drawing/sheet name/numbers they are referring to. In effect, you would just tell the marker to keep watch on viewport "Detail 20". You would, unfortunately, need to keep all your eggs in one basket until NNA realises that more interfile communication than just one-way workgroup referencing is needed.

Joe, as the two Petes (my namesakes, of course) point out... Set Sun Position is another thing you might consider. That creates the Sun - and in most cases, you will want to increase its rate of fusion reaction.

Sorry, Pete. I've done full-time CAD (etc) consulting work to architects for over 10 years and can't think of anyone who would sit down and type (or choose) keywords for thousands of individual detail files. The current implementation of VW is much more realistic. You have your library files, which are hopefully named in a reasonably systematic fashion. You have your resources, named as well. Finally, you have the Find Resource feature. Does not work? Well, if you can't even name a symbol, hatch or whatever in a sensible fashion, would you really do the keyword entry?

Right. Well, what's the difference between (i) Spotlight or (ii) a FileMaker Pro database, which can open the file for you? I thought this ALB system operated by querying AutoCAD files and indexing strings - in the same way Spotlight actually does. Sounded like magic and obviously that was the right sound. If explicit user input is required, why would a system that only deals with files of one specific type be superior to one that (i) does indexed searches in non-binary files without user input and (ii) does very fast searches by the said input? I may be wrong, I may not understand, but tell me how ALB differs from Spotlight - except that ALB obviously cannot do searches inside text, PDF etc. documents?

If you do it manually (as you mainly would - VW sections are unsatisfactory especially after design stage), why don't you use classes instead? Or viewports with class visibility control.

What goes around, comes around.

This we already have. Make a copy of VW, call it whatever you want, like Al. When you need to render in a separate window, launch Al and do the rendering with it. At least on the Mac you only need to make a copy of the program itself. You can even open the current working file - it is opened as a new file as the actual file is "read only"/"used by another application".

Indeed. In the 20 years I've been involved in other people's choice of hardware and software, I've seen this many times. Why, some have even switched from the Mac to Windows just because the box is a tad cheaper and have not considered the overall benefits of the better platform, ie. long-term financial implications.

An excellent idea!

Yes. I tried a fancy wireless multi-button mouse just recently for a few weeks, but that can only be held with a Secret Grip. The Apple mouse I can hold (or not hold: sometimes I just reach a finger towards it and it works) any way I like.

Awning window?

Blah blah blah to you too.

Well well - we seem to have a new member: a dinosaur from the punch-card era of CAD. After being exposed to the actual punch card driven CAD-systems in the early 1980s, I could hardly contain myself when a program called AutoCAD claimed to be interactive, when all you did was to punch the cards with the command line. Antiquated constructs have made even Autodesk to realise that in architecture, there is no future for souped-up drafting programs so the firm is encouraging architects to get Revit. No, Autodesk being clinically pure from innovation, they just bought a program and started to market it. Some individuals perhaps continue to use AutoCAD, but that is their problem. Yes. AutoCAD is indeed retarding many design industries. And no, I would not want to design a garden with ArchiCAD, whereas that would be quite easy with VectorWorks.

Yes, I know. Since interactive scaling is one of the most fundamental aspects available in VW, I was not sure whether you had something else in mind. It is so unfortunate that these mode changes still lack mind-reading capabilities. I've (obviously) pressed U, I and O (not to mention Y) countless times and so changed modes etc. A good program would know if something like this is unintentional...

I guess I have to welcome a new Finn - who seems to be a foul-mouthed complete idiot directly from a chat room environment. Did Daddy really give you the permission to use the computer and did you really write that yourself, without help from the Sis? Obviously you did because your capitalization, not to mention expression, is pre-school level.

I'm with Hugo. You get, among other things, layer transparency and some other features that require the OS X Quartz -graphics system (there may be something similar some day in Vista), a fully-editable colour palette and, last but not least, the possibility of conventiently and efficiently use an ergonomically superior one-button mouse instead of carpal tunnel syndrome -inducing multi-button thingies that require a manual and reference card. Despite the FUD (fear, uncertainty, deception) spreaded even here by NNA representatives, learning Mac OS is not difficult and I have never known anyone, who would have moved from Mac to Windows on other grounds than the availability of some special software or cost. At some stages there have been speed issues, too, but they are generally exaggerated: the slowest part of a CAD-system is always the wetware.