I?ve finally put a finger on exactly why I?d prefer an intelligent one-file teamwork system (aka ArchiCAD TeamWork) over a dumb multi-file system (aka Workgroup Referencing).
The inflexibility, the need to link files together and the need for preplanning when using Workgroup Referencing all culminate to provide a system that requires a lot of setup and no turning back.
What we really need is a system that?s flexible on the fly.
Take, for example, a simple scenario:
My Director is working on some planning-design elevations. He asks me to set the file up with Sheet Layers, title blocks, etc. and make some adjustments to some of the elevations. Meanwhile he is going to carry on working on one of the elevations.
We don?t want to split the elevations into other files because we don?t want the aggravation and we want the ability to flick through the layers and compare and edit each of them quickly. Speed and ease is of the essence.
A multi-file Workgroup Reference system does nothing for us in this scenario, where as a one-file system with intelligent management would mean, at the click of a button or two, he could work on the elevation and meanwhile I could work on the rest of the file.
The difference between the two ways is a matter of light years and I really don?t understand why they?re even mooted as being competing systems.
P.S. generally what we do in the scenario above is to duplicate the file and then copy and paste the edits once they're done. For all sorts of reasons this is less than ideal.
You can post now and register later.
If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.
Question
Christiaan
I?ve finally put a finger on exactly why I?d prefer an intelligent one-file teamwork system (aka ArchiCAD TeamWork) over a dumb multi-file system (aka Workgroup Referencing).
The inflexibility, the need to link files together and the need for preplanning when using Workgroup Referencing all culminate to provide a system that requires a lot of setup and no turning back.
What we really need is a system that?s flexible on the fly.
Take, for example, a simple scenario:
My Director is working on some planning-design elevations. He asks me to set the file up with Sheet Layers, title blocks, etc. and make some adjustments to some of the elevations. Meanwhile he is going to carry on working on one of the elevations.
We don?t want to split the elevations into other files because we don?t want the aggravation and we want the ability to flick through the layers and compare and edit each of them quickly. Speed and ease is of the essence.
A multi-file Workgroup Reference system does nothing for us in this scenario, where as a one-file system with intelligent management would mean, at the click of a button or two, he could work on the elevation and meanwhile I could work on the rest of the file.
The difference between the two ways is a matter of light years and I really don?t understand why they?re even mooted as being competing systems.
P.S. generally what we do in the scenario above is to duplicate the file and then copy and paste the edits once they're done. For all sorts of reasons this is less than ideal.
Link to comment
22 answers to this question
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.