Petri

quote: Originally posted by Katie: You can open two different versions of VW at the same time - VW 10 and Viewer 11, but you cannot, without holding down the "m" key open VW 11 and viewer 11 at the same time. I have VW 11 and VW 11 Viewer open right now, without any key pressing. (Mac OS X)

What OS, Stuart?

But, Jonathan - as a layer link it IS like a symbol... Since the current system works with a consistent user interface (ie. data behaves and is handled the same way regardless of its source, current work file or referenced file) and allows easy rotating, mirroring and moving, why would we need a new confusing paradigm?

Occasionally one may want to include a script to a view change, such as changing class attributes, layer scales or font sizes.

Curious. I have on occasion done this with VW 9 on Mac OS. The same file cannot be printed with the Viewer and edited with VW at the same time, though.

quote: Originally posted by John CPR: I have started to look at layer linking but it looks very convulted. I don't want to argue (and definitely don't want to be an apologist for NNA and VW!), but I can't really understand how layer linking would be convoluted - it is at most two menu commands (create LL, unlock.) After that one can eg. duplicate the link if need be. quote: Originally posted by eric.rktek But to name names, mving and positioning reference files is much easier to deal with in AutoCad and Microstation. Can't say that I would know how it works in these programs, but the underlying logic and purpose of VW's referencing is such that moving and positioning does not make sense. The reference is not a single object and the whole idea is that it is in the same coordinate system as the data in your current work file: this ensures data integrity.

Processing and querying even medium-size databases, especially if one wants to update or populate a database using external data is painful, sometimes almost impossible. The option to index fields would make things a lot easier. At present, I use techniques such as FOREACHOBJECT and temporary names, but they are slow and the latter is even dangerous, not to mention the multiple steps required. Validation would not be a bad thing, either.

I'm not even sure why one would like to move and rotate reference files, unless they are used as sort of symbols: say, a multi-unit residential development, with each type in a separate file, referenced to an overall plan.

quote: Originally posted by jonas mac: Briefly , a fundamental in GDS is to use the intelligence of the programme by USING the object structure ,ie, before you draw lines you create an object giving it a name and a hook/insertion point so that when you click on any part of the drawing it tells you on the screen what object you have clicked on. I don't think it is possible to create such object structure in VW and get it translated via DWG/DXF, but who knows. Ask your friends how they tackle AutoCAD drawings; they might even give you a sample AutoCAD file to import into VW to see how it is configured.

Use layer linking for the referenced data.

quote: Originally posted by Kevin: My issue with the speed of VW is the speed of the OIP. Tabing through it is slow. Expanding the Door and Window OIP is slow as well. It has become a real annoyance. Yep - I should have included that, not to mention file dialogs. The current Finder (10.3.5) is still hopelessly slow and, compared with OS 9, lost some important features like remembering what file was opened last in a folder via Open dialog. Maybe one day we get our fast Macs back: I do whenever I use Classic...

quote: Originally posted by david bertrand: I saw the review in MacWorld of VW 11. I emailed the magazine to ask about speed issues that I've read about on this forum. Most speed issues relate to seriously complex files: complex 3D models with NURBs etc, large terrain models (100K+ data points) or simply huge files; OS platform is also an issue and I don't use VW under Mac OS X if I believe I may need to say 'select all' to 40,000+ polylines with nearly a million vertices. (I am _not_ joking!)

David, Please do not try to emulate AutoCAD with VectorWorks - while it might work, it is very inefficient. VW has features and functionality not found in AutoCAD and those are what really make the program so useful and productive. Eg. for building plans, use walls instead of lines & offsets.

Well, Ziska - connecting 3D loci would do little good anyway: the resulting 3D polygon is not likely to be planar. Non-planar 3D polygons are not handled well in any CAD-program, so such surfaces are usually triangulated.

Ben, You might just delete class '0' in each library file - then everything in that class will be reclassified as 'None'. There is little harm done if components of a symbol are in None class, unless you specifically want to control their visibility. [ 09-06-2004, 12:34 AM: Message edited by: Petri ]

Ben, The groups are likely to be in class 'None' although their members are in some other class. If the 'parent' itself is not visible, the 'children' can't be either.

quote: Originally posted by markoos: On another note, I may have a misunderstanding of how classes work, at least in conjunction with layers. I have only been using Vectorworks for a few weeks, and i am more akin to AutoCAD and Microstaion. As I understand it, "classes" in VW are synonomous with "layers" in AC. Think layers as different drawings - either spatially or thematically separated. Technically each layer is a list of objects (meaning among other things that if you delete a layer, everything on it will be deleted.) Classes on the other hand are properties of objects. Using them both in a considered manner clarifies the design process. Layers can certainly be used for 2D drafting. You might have each floor as a separate layer and also each discipline for each floor. (In a large project you would have each floor as a separate file.) Disciplines could also reside in separate files and be brought in for referencing purposes via Workgroup References. This allows several people to work on the same job and makes it easy to update consultants' input. Anyway, you may be in a position to help the office to make a quantum leap in productivity. Your experience with AutoCAD and MicroStation could be put to good use, if you avoid pure imitation of the processes of those programs and instead introduce good working habits based on the capabilities of VW.

Jaws PDF Creator solves the problem for good.

We bought the HP 130nr in June, as a replacement for an Epson 3000, and have been very pleased with it. Colour output is impressive and simple line drawings come out just fine on plain bond paper.

Sorry, Katie - that only keeps the vertical or horizontal distance, not the actual distance between lines in an angle. [ 08-12-2004, 09:19 AM: Message edited by: Petri ]

Without knowing how the new command works, it sounds like a cheap and nasty fix to a fundamental design flaw.

Fortunately, no. Instead, you can have several people working on the same project via workgroup referencing - they just do different things (as is appropriate).

Not that I would know much about VW 10 or later, but I run VW 9 in Classic mode (MacOS 9.2.2), except when I have really big files - then I start in OS 9. Classic is considerably faster than OS X 10.3, so, Klaus, I would recommend that. Going to an older OS version is quite difficult; I have the feeling that you can't even install a separate copy of the old version on the same hard disc/partition.

The 2D Conversion Resolution preference might be of help (set to low for fewer vertices) - but really, we should get a polyline from a polyline. VW, however, handles even large numbers of vertices quite well. I have files with millions of vertices (contour maps) and they are manageable.

quote: Originally posted by Mbuck: Maybe your right, I shouldn?t generalise it?s probably only those Architects in Sydney that don?t use Vectorworks ? most probably a small band of misguided individuals. You sure are a prime example of a BS () engineer. [ 08-02-2004, 03:25 AM: Message edited by: Petri ]