topic Re: Library overhaul in Libraries & objects

Library overhaul

Anonymous — Thu, 08 Apr 2004 17:09:19 GMT

~/archiben wrote:
on a general note, i do think that the whole library process needs a complete overhaul:
...

why do we have to reload the entire library set when just adding a library to the current set (maybe mac only?)

This has been one of my boggles especially since some of the projects have been started in one version and continue in another with objects from both version used, or new objects being added, etc. And no, it's not only a mac thing.

But I suppose this is a discussion for another thread.

Re: Library overhaul (Was Patches Don't Show in PlotMaker)

Anonymous — Fri, 09 Apr 2004 15:46:23 GMT

Sergio wrote:
~/archiben wrote:
on a general note, i do think that the whole library process needs a complete overhaul:
...

why do we have to reload the entire library set when just adding a library to the current set (maybe mac only?)
But I suppose this is a discussion for another thread.

No, I think this is a good place to start a thread...

We can change the subject line of the thread like in e-scribe? Or Djordje can move it to a more appropriate area...

I think a discussion about a library overhaul is necessary. It would be nice if GSHQ could monitor the discussion as well. Linking changes everything!...in a good way. Let's make it better!

Re: Library overhaul (Was Patches Don't Show in PlotMaker)

Djordje — Sat, 10 Apr 2004 04:31:11 GMT

"Richard Schlangen wrote:
We can change the subject line of the thread like in e-scribe? Or Djordje can move it to a more appropriate area...

Done, both.

Enjoy the discussion!

Re: Library overhaul

Anonymous — Sat, 10 Apr 2004 11:52:47 GMT

There are two issues with the object libraries, well actually three now that I think about it.

1. Searching libraries for the part you need.

This requires improved ways to organize, browse and search for library parts. This has improved in 8.1 with the view by subtype option, and I trust we will see this improvement continue. It would be nice if there were also some structure for assigning and searching by keywords. The preview icon needs to be fixed so that it is visible in the Mac Finder (as it is in Windows Explorer).

2. Figuring out how to use the part once you find it.

It is often very difficult to figure out whether a library part will do what you want or how it does what it does. Trying out different parameters to see what happens can be very tedious, especially if you end up finding that you can't get it to do what you want. What is needed is some standard form of help or instructions that at least show the plan & 3D views of the part along with descriptions of what the various parameters do. (I have some further ideas on this which I will post later if I have the time.)

3. Keeping track of the parts used in the project.

This one is easily solved by one of my other wishes (Unified Project File Types). By making the PLN function as a PLA with the project library embedded in project file, many problems are solved (though there are also some significant issues of version management and macro loading to address): The project cannot be fouled up by loading the wrong library or because a change is made to one of the library parts used; The project file becomes truly and easily portable (just copy the file to your laptop to take to the client meeting); And project backup and archiving becomes automatic without the need to remember to save as PLA.

Re: Library overhaul

david nicholson-cole — Sat, 10 Apr 2004 20:19:37 GMT

Matthew wrote:
There are two issues with the object libraries, well actually three now that I think about it.
2. Figuring out how to use the part once you find it.

It is often very difficult to figure out whether a library part will do what you want or how it does what it does. Trying out different parameters to see what happens can be very tedious, especially if you end up finding that you can't get it to do what you want. What is needed is some standard form of help or instructions that at least show the plan & 3D views of the part along with descriptions of what the various parameters do. (I have some further ideas on this which I will post later if I have the time.)

Would you like to write further on this as an article for the GDL Cookbook - Please?????

Re: Library overhaul

Anonymous — Sat, 10 Apr 2004 22:17:46 GMT

david wrote:
Would you like to write further on this as an article for the GDL Cookbook - Please?????

It would be my pleasure. How much and how soon?

PS. I'll even throw in a surprise widget for the CD.

Re: Library overhaul

david nicholson-cole — Sun, 11 Apr 2004 15:20:48 GMT

Matthew wrote:
david wrote:
Would you like to write further on this as an article for the GDL Cookbook - Please?????
It would be my pleasure. How much and how soon?

PS. I'll even throw in a surprise widget for the CD.

I am open to edit and print any contributions especially on areas where i am not so strong, eg File I/O (Laurent godel wrote that bit for the last edition in 2000). but he seems to be out of GDL now.
dont worry about format, i bash it into shape. Karl did one for me back in march on the meaning of XFORM. I then formatted it into 2.5 pages.
Choose a special topic in GDL. discuss with me first to make sure its not covered. The magazine style of the book makes guest contributions easy to incorporate.
thanks for the offer. All contributions fully bylined, no matter how much editing i have to apply to get it into shape.
>>>david

Re: Library overhaul

Anonymous — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 15:11:43 GMT

Matthew wrote:
There are two issues with the object libraries, well actually three now that I think about it.

1. Searching libraries for the part you need.

This requires improved ways to organize, browse and search for library parts. This has improved in 8.1 with the view by subtype option, and I trust we will see this improvement continue. It would be nice if there were also some structure for assigning and searching by keywords. The preview icon needs to be fixed so that it is visible in the Mac Finder (as it is in Windows Explorer).

2. Figuring out how to use the part once you find it.

It is often very difficult to figure out whether a library part will do what you want or how it does what it does. Trying out different parameters to see what happens can be very tedious, especially if you end up finding that you can't get it to do what you want. What is needed is some standard form of help or instructions that at least show the plan & 3D views of the part along with descriptions of what the various parameters do. (I have some further ideas on this which I will post later if I have the time.)

3. Keeping track of the parts used in the project.

This one is easily solved by one of my other wishes (Unified Project File Types). By making the PLN function as a PLA with the project library embedded in project file, many problems are solved (though there are also some significant issues of version management and macro loading to address): The project cannot be fouled up by loading the wrong library or because a change is made to one of the library parts used; The project file becomes truly and easily portable (just copy the file to your laptop to take to the client meeting); And project backup and archiving becomes automatic without the need to remember to save as PLA.

These are just some of the reasons why GS should scrap library creation all together and concentrate on promoting mfg. support for their product. It is quite incredible what one can do with a single object but is quite unnecessary and overly time consuming for the most part. You currently can't even get similar items to behave/ appear the same way or that use identical parameters. Windows and doors get worse with each new release. All the hype about script piracy preventing this is IMO an unfounded claim as there are many objects out there with scripts wide open and this does not seem to be happening at all.

Re: Library overhaul

tsturm — Mon, 12 Apr 2004 21:50:06 GMT

4. Keeping consistancy between libraries.

Came across this one after purchasing another member's library parts.

I just purchased this collection of parts. I wanted to make all the parts use a different pen as the default. I thought that I could simply change the template file to a new setting. Then after speaking to the author, it was decided that the parts retain the settings even after the template is changed. So that no matter what is done to the Parent is not passed on the attached Child. But for all uses (Child) from the time the template (Parent) is altered on will use the altered setting.

I would hope there is a better way to use the templates to update or unify a collection of library objects. Something more along the lines of Quark, Pagemaker or InDesign.

Matt, does this fit with your ideas??

Re: Library overhaul

Anonymous — Tue, 13 Apr 2004 02:57:52 GMT

There are lots of issues with organizing libraries. So many that we cannot possibly hope to resolve them here in a clear and comprehensive manner. We can only try to communicate to GS the depth and importance of this issue (and trust that they probably already comprehend this). There are a tremendous number of things in the world of building design and construction. Organizing and managing them is no small task.

I agree that better ways to control defaults need to be developed. One is through templates. Others are through rethinking how we assign pens and layers, reengineering the favorites system, and improving the storing, browsing and searching techniques.

The big short term improvement I want to see is fulfillment of my long standing wish for project libraries (which I now see as being included in the project file as they are with in the PLA). The various external libraries would be loaded as reference libraries only and so shouldn't require the long load times as they presently do. There are many other advantages to this but I've already written enough on that.

So now it's finally time to go to sleep.

Re: Library overhaul

Anonymous — Mon, 03 May 2004 23:44:12 GMT

With specific reference to loading libraries we are experiencing long upload times across our network for archicad files. This is probably a common problem as running multiple licenses across networks and LAN's is not unique. Does anyone have any strategies for improving upload times of libraries? Given the comments on this thread, Graphisoft have not as yet dealt with this. I would be most interested in any suggestions as files are loading up to 5 times slower when libraries are on the server as opposed to the Desktop.

Re: Library overhaul

Anonymous — Wed, 05 May 2004 05:02:07 GMT

neil wrote:
With specific reference to loading libraries we are experiencing long upload times across our network for archicad files. This is probably a common problem as running multiple licenses across networks and LAN's is not unique. Does anyone have any strategies for improving upload times of libraries? Given the comments on this thread, Graphisoft have not as yet dealt with this. I would be most interested in any suggestions as files are loading up to 5 times slower when libraries are on the server as opposed to the Desktop.

There have been numerous posts on this subject as well. Although I am loathe to search for them at this time, I believe the most common practice is to keep project libraries locally. Your firms entire library should be accessable through the network allowing quick(?) updates to the project library.
If you have the resources, do yourself a favour and appoint a library manager. This person should be skilled or interested in obtaining GDL skills. Even for a small firm, this library manager is every bit as important as the project manager. His or her assignability to the task of library management could range anywhere from 25-85%...given your needs..