Jump to content
  • 1
WhoCanDo

Bring back Attached Records in Object Info

Question

Hi,

 

In vw2016 (our last version) we use to be able to pick all (for example) and Object Info would list the Records attached, even though some were crosses, some were blank and some were grey (to indicate that the Record was not attached to all selected items).

 

This was an excellent way of not needing to know what object has what record and being able to revise the data within each record as required. For example, if my walls are mud brick and the clients says he wants to change to clay brick then I can select all and change the brick type. This may also apply if some of the walls were changed. I would marquee the walls (and probably also select a window or other object) and change the data field value.

 

With vw2018, if more than one object is picked with different Records then only common records are visible. That means that if even if my walls are all the same type, if some of the walls have an attached plaster record, then I will not see the plaster record unless I select the specific wall with plaster.

 

This is as simple as I can make it because we have 20+ records of which can be attached to similar objects as required. To pick all walls and see all the Records attached is now impossible, and even if we were to use Custom Selection, the variables would be unmanagable.

 

Please bring back the complete records list, even if it was only the used records.

Share this post


Link to post

16 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0

Wouldn't it be better to change the wall style for a wall type change like the one you noted?

(Yes In a fan of the newer more direct record interface)

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Sorry Matt, I don't quite understand what you meant.

 

However, this is and example only.

 

Take two squares and a line. One square has data A & B and the other has A & C. If you select all you will see no records attached because the line is selected, and that has no records attached. Now de-select the line and you see both squares have A but you wont see B nor C.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
4 hours ago, WhoCanDo said:

Please bring back the complete records list, even if it was only the used records.

Yes, it would be very very annoying to not have records show up if there is one item without records in the selection.

 

On one hand I can understand not showing non-attached records, on the other hand if I want to attach another record to all selected object and that is not possible because it does not show non-attached records in the OIP because there is already another record attached then that would be quite annoying.

There should be at least an option to either show the new behaviour of only common records or to show all records anyway in case of a selection of objects with records attached.

 

I'll do some testing myself later to see the new behaviour, as I've not ran into that situation yet in VW2018.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

You should create selection sets. Remember that with the custom selection tool, you can save your custom selection as a script.

From then on, you can just doubleclick it and it will select all objects with that specific criteria.

 

I would also suggest one record for the same object type, this will make it much easier for you. You could just add one additional parameter that sets the "choice" instead of using different records for each "choice".

 

Last but not least, automating the attachment of that record would also be a huge improvement. You wouldn't need to worry about objects not having it. It can be done with one of my custom tools available from 2018:

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Thanks Art, I think you are seeing my view.

 

It's more complicated than that Hippocode. I tried to simplify things to begin the discussion and it's very hard to explain uncommon processes so I also used examples that I thought people could relate too.

 

Using the above example of two squares and a line. If the squares had horizontal lines at 50mm apart but I didn't want the lines to pattern match when placed beside each other then the first square would have a start of 50mm and the second would have a start of 25.

 

Each square has the same record so Custom Selection would select both and if I changed the start then it would make both the same start which is what I don't want. Imagine this with a jigsaw puzzle. The top and bottom rows have a straight edge so I could say the start was the same if I wanted to pattern match but I don't want to select all with the same record.

 

Hopefully the attached will show our actually process. Panels 2 to 11 need a start of 32 and 12 to 15 need a start of 10 even though they all have the same record of "Panel". I need to marquee the top panels so I can change the starts. In vw2016 this could be done because I would see all items with all records and know that only "Panel" records will be affecting panels.

 

A tough one I know but this is our daily process so this is a need rather than a want because creating Custom Selections to pick only panels with marks 2 to 11 or 2, 5, 7, 10, etc. would be a nightmare.

Selection.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

In the above example I have selected all the walls, panels and grid pattern by Alt-Marqueeing the top. In vw2016 I would see Panel Record and Wall Record and I would change the start on the panels but in vw2018 I would see no Records because I have Walls, Panels & Grid with different Records.

Edited by WhoCanDo

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

 

On 11/8/2017 at 8:48 AM, Hippocode said:

I would also suggest one record for the same object type, this will make it much easier for you. You could just add one additional parameter that sets the "choice" instead of using different records for each "choice".

 

As I mentioned this in another discussion, sometimes you can not change records by adding additional field's because they are the client's records so you have to resort to adding additional records to maintain data integrity of their records when exchanging files back and forth. Not to mention that there may be multiple parties each with their own data sets/records.

 

Then it is important that you can:

1. See what records are attached to objects in the selection, not just the common ones but all of them even if a record is only used for one object of the selection

2. Attach records that are not used yet, which requires you can see all records and not just the ones that are already assigned to objects in the selection

 

So I totally agree with @WhoCanDothat only showing common records should not be the only mode but that there should at least be an option to see the other records as well.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Nice one Art, Love your understanding.

 

In the 22yrs I've been drawing in VW, I never had a client using VW, so integrity of data records is not an issue for us but I can see the need in the future. Even when other CADs are exported to .dwg or .dxf for me to use, there is no relevant data (BIM) that is conveyed.

 

However, you get the point :-)

 

Here's another quick analogy for other CAD users in other employment fields .. a landscaper has many plant and trees with the Record "Plant". Some plant will be Walnut and some Rose. When Select All or Marqueeing some areas of Rose, maybe a Curb or Grass or Feature Rock or Gravel will be within the selection and therefore no Records will be listed. You can't Custom Select "Plant" because you don't want the trees.

 

I could liken the above with lighting mixed with scafolding or seating. Some installers may have the Record "Client" and fields "Job Number", "Order Number", "Red Light", "Fixed Light", etc. so they can reserve lighting for a client job. You can't custom select "Client" so Marqueeing is the option and if selecting a busy area of lights you may pick up other objects and get no Records listed for revisions.

 

Here's hoping for a return to vw2016 flexibility.

Edited by WhoCanDo

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Ok you've made clear you need this feature. Since for you this is a regression, and it usually takes some time for this to be fixed (IF), I suggest you set up some custom selection scripts. You will have some variations but these can replace your old way of selecting the object records you need to edit.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

This is still hindering our drawing process enormously.

 

Maybe I should approach this with some questions.

 

If I have 230 objects on my layer (some lines, some walls, some polygons, etc., each with a different record attached, and half with the same record attached, how do I delete all the record attachments except for the common one?

 

No scripting answers please 😉

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
9 hours ago, WhoCanDo said:

This is still hindering our drawing process enormously.

 

Maybe I should approach this with some questions.

 

If I have 230 objects on my layer (some lines, some walls, some polygons, etc., each with a different record attached, and half with the same record attached, how do I delete all the record attachments except for the common one?

 

No scripting answers please 😉

 

There are two manual solutions I can think of -

  1. Select all the objects, switch to the Data tab in the OIP, click on the three dots and step through the objects one at a time detaching the unwanted records. (I saw your post in the other thread.)
  2. Make sure you have a backup copy of your file. Select all the objects on your layer, cut and paste them into a clean file. Open the Resource Manager and using the dropdown isolate to only look at Record Formats. Delete the record formats you don't want from the file. This will remove them from the objects. Select all the objects again and paste them back into your original file.

Kevin

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
2 hours ago, Kevin McAllister said:

 

There are two manual solutions I can think of -

  1. Make sure you have a backup copy of your file. Select all the objects on your layer, cut and paste them into a clean file. Open the Resource Manager and using the dropdown isolate to only look at Record Formats. Delete the record formats you don't want from the file. This will remove them from the objects. Select all the objects again and paste them back into your original file.

Kevin

 

 

Sweet. Simple.

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Thanks Kevin,

No.2 sounds the go. I'll use that while everyone is waiting for the attached records to be put back into the OIP for quick and easy deletion. 🎉

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
Posted (edited)
On 8/22/2018 at 12:54 AM, WhoCanDo said:

I'll use that while everyone is waiting for the attached records to be put back into the OIP for quick and easy deletion. 🎉

 

 

 

Assuming this won't happen anytime soon... this could be solved by a simple script that lets you filter your selection, by choosing one of the records attached to your selection from a drop down menu.

Edited by Hippocode

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

Nice to hear from you Hippocode,

 

On my Tuesday post I requested ideas that did not include scripting. The reason being that thousands of VW users out there don't know how to script.

 

Even so, if I were to write a script, I think the variables would be too great since sometimes I want to select an object with a record to change a field, but not all objects with that record (Digressed slightly). So, if I wanted to remove the records from half of my example, I would have the monotonous task of selecting some from many and then Kevin's idea will work, however annoying VW makes it.

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×