Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'feature request'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Announcements
    • Announcements
    • News You Need
    • Job Board
  • Feedback
    • Roadmap
    • Wishlist - Feature and Content Requests
    • Known Issues
    • Wishes Granted / Issues Resolved
    • Forum Feedback
  • General
    • Troubleshooting
    • General Discussion
    • Architecture
    • Site Design
    • Entertainment
    • Vision and Previsualization
    • Braceworks
    • ConnectCAD
    • Energos
    • Rendering
    • Workflows
    • Buying and Selling Vectorworks Licenses
    • Hardware
  • Customization
    • AI Visualizer
    • Marionette
    • Vectorscript
    • Python Scripting
    • SDK
    • 3rd Party Services, Products and Events
    • Data Tags
  • Solids Modeling and 3D Printing
    • Subdivision
    • Solids Modeling
    • 3D Printing
  • Vectorworks in Action
  • Archive
    • Resource Sharing
    • Machine Design


  • In-Person Training - US
  • In-Person Training - UK
  • Coffee Breaks
  • Essentials Seminars
  • Webinars
  • Community Groups


  • Knowledgebase
    • Tech Bulletins
    • Troubleshooting
    • Workflows
    • How To
    • FAQs


  • Marionette - Objects
  • Marionette - Networks
  • Marionette - Nodes
  • Marionette - Menu Commands

Product Groups

There are no results to display.

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start








Found 12 results

  1. hello, is it possible to reposition the source/destination flag of a circuit with arrows? Using the reshape tool didn't work. I would like to have the bottom flag in the same position as the upper one without having to use a termination panel (which we don't use in this case) thanks, george (sorry, if this question has been asked before. couldn't find anything. but in that case a link to the post or the help page would be great too. 🙂 )
  2. Would it be a big issue to add the option for 0.5U units to the drop-down of the equipment height as I can't manually change the rack frame height? Best, George
  3. For the most part, ConnectCAD does a pretty good job of sizing/enabling/disabling a device's make/model in the front elevation view. However, when I have a device that is less than 1U tall, this function often struggles. I've included a picture of such a situation. After reading through other similar threads, I understand that you guys try not to overload the elevation tools with features/customization that might be intimidating for newer users. That said, it would be nice to be able to simply hide make/model on devices. Is this something you would consider adding? Thanks!
  4. As I am working on the rack elevations new questions start popping up. Like general questions regarding the way rack elevations can be drawn in ConnectCAD. here's some feedback/ feature request: As many of our clients are used to getting detailed rack elevations showing line drawings of front and back of almost all rack equipemnt, it would be very useful if all rack equipment could really be represented by a symbol as well. Currently this only works for regular equipment (RackU 5,6) and for single cards (Slots 1 and 3 in RU9), but not for rack frames (and possibly for the actual rack). Hope, there is still some space on the team's issue tracker. best, george
  5. since it is causing me trouble again: may I add another "tiny" future/feature request? 😬 In another post @Nikolay Zhelyazkov mentioned that the circuit description (for arrow circuits) is limited to a select number of data elements for source and end device. a bit of context: in my current case, I am trying to reference the room of a device which is stored in a custom user field instead of having to place every device in a room in the rack elevation view) unless I missed another option (can't put it in device name or tag): any chance that these will be extended? not sure, what part of the programming requires a limit, but maybe the user data fields could be added? (where anything could be stored via the data manager) thanks a lot, george
  6. I want to preface `this rant/feature request/bug report` as coming from a long standing user, professor, industry professional, and enthusiast. I'm not really looking for a workaround or a third party tool: I want Vectorworks to natively fix the following issues. I also develop a piece of software that uses the XML Data Exchange so I have a fairly deep knowledge of how Vectorworks functions. These are core issues in the program. MVR does address several of these issues indirectly, but the export and import of raw data is a critical part of many workflows and it should either be depreciated or fixed. File -> Import -> Lighting Device Data Data Import needs to import Position/Rotation data when a fixture is created and the field is included in Data Exchange or via the Import. Currently the tool creates "Orphans" for anything it can't match and ignores Position X/Y/Z. This fails in metric or imperial with the format of `#.##m` or `#.##'`. I suspect this is because anything that is "unmatched" is set as an orphan and the position is ignored. This makes moving data from another program into Vectorworks. As a side note I believe this behavior is present in the Data Exchange workflow as well, because when I add a light and provide `PosX/Y/Z` data via the XML it also appears as an orphan without the correct position. The identifier should also be allowed in mappings a second time as Vectorworks disposes of it if it doesn't match a UUID. As such I can't synchronize another drawing to Vectorworks UUIDs by doing an import, export to sync up the UUID, and then reimporting to try to correct position information. Workflow example: I use my software to examine dimensions offset from zero and correct minor errors like x:=`15'-6.23"` and correct it to x:=`15'-6"` Workflow Example: Export data from Capture 2020 or lower into Vectorworks I suspect there are other fields that are ignored/suppressed and that logic should be audited Data Exchange Seems to suffer from the same issues which is not surprising Spotlight Data Exchange (Feature Request) This API should be documented and exposed. It is a simple XML exchange and I was able to reverse engineer it in a couple of hours, but it would be nice to have some documentation on how Vectorworks processes the files. Excel Import/Export (Feature Request) Given the fact Excel exchange is now standard in the architectural modules I would like to see lighting device data exchanged via Excel in Spotlight as well. We used to have this with the "Editable Worksheet" back in Vectorworks 12 (not 2012)--I can't remember exactly when it was eliminated but that was a huge blow to productivity. It seems like we're basically there again, and, I suspect implementing this would address my concerns above. In Conclusion Can I make all of the above work? Yes, but (as I discovered while teaching a class on lighting design) these tools behave inconsistently and in a clunky manner with no easy solutions. It would be nice to see 10 or 20 developer hours spent cleaning up these scripts and I would be happy to volunteer my time to explain--in detail--the issues to a developer if they don't understand the industry enough to make an adequate feature request. I realize the vast majority of my posts on this forum come across as crotchety at best, but that is because I come here when I have a problem I can not solve on my own. I really miss the basic export/import functionality from Vectorworks as it was a good way to teach how the software thinks, how data works, and why some tools are preferable to others. The database has always been the strength of Vectorworks and this has eroded in recent years. For someone like me who has their own database and workflow for production this amounts to being hamstrung in my workflow. My students prefer to visualize in Capture and draft in Vectorworks, but for the first time I can remember several of them have opted to create paperwork and plots in Capture rather than use Vectorworks at all and this is a major contributing factor, hence my post. -Daniel B. Chapman
  7. I've run into a hiccup where if i want to hang a truss vertically from a single motor Braceworks defines it as not properly supported and requires the second motor to be attached. As the truss is hanging vertically it is sufficiently supported. Same as if using a T or X join peice of truss, if all connection points are not connected it believes it is not supported.
  8. I would appreciate an interactive table for editing site modifiers. This would apply most effectively to road modifiers and pads with retaining edges. I would need it to display elevation, and slope between points and allow me to edit or lock either and calculate the other. It would also be useful to add vertexes, like rows in the proper location. The modifier in your drawing, when editing could appear with numbered vertexes that correspond to rows in the worksheet. I've attached a screenshot of the google sheet I use to calculate road polys, but having this integrated would be very helpful...
  9. Would be great if Data Tags could be used in annotations for elevations and link to the windows and doors to call them up in Elevation when the project layers are referenced.
  10. I would appreciate the ability to create a drainage network in a similar manner to an irrigation network. I've created records and tables for drainage structures and drain lines, but it would be nice if the "pipes" were connected to the structures in such a manner that adjusting an invert in/out could recalculate numbers like pipe length, slope, cover, etc. I would also like the ability to display a structure and line schedule associated with the network.
  11. The feature to vote a posted reply up / down for 'best answer' to a posted question is currently a feature that's only available to posts made in the 'Troubleshooting' board. I think the up / down voting feature should be offered more broadly, as almost all of the posts on the forum are asking direction on how to something in Vectorworks. It would make it much easier to find the 'best' way to do something if any post were able to be nominated for 'Best Answer', and then it would get highlighted by a bold green box (or something other than white).
  12. So many Mac programs (and I assume PC) allow the key combination Command/Ctrl-Y to "redo" as in, not just re-do that one last "undo" but as in "repeat the last action again." For example, if I format something in a Microsoft document and hit Command-Y on the next selection it will be formatted the same. In VW if I try it it just says "no more actions to redo." This is such a basic function that has been absent from VW for so long (as in, forever) that I have to assume there's some fundamental reason why it can't be done but I keep thinking about it so I thought I'd write. Thanks, Jeff
  • Create New...