<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:taxo="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>topic ArchiCAD's Library Parts &amp;quot;FM_&amp;quot; parameters, Facility Management, COBie? in Collaboration with other software</title>
    <link>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/ArchiCAD-s-Library-Parts-quot-FM-quot-parameters-Facility/m-p/284556#M37298</link>
    <description>&lt;DIV class="actalk-migrated-content"&gt;&lt;R&gt;Hi there,&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
This question is for Graphisoft team.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Few days ago, I rescued and old document for GDL standards that was published in year 2000, and I have found out that there few pages that were dedicate to a group of parameters with the "FM_" prefix, that were made specifically for ArchiFM.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
What have drawn my attention are:&lt;BR /&gt;
1. When ever I want to create a new library part, parameters with the prefix of "FM_" are still available.&lt;BR /&gt;
2. There is nothing written in Graphisoft's modern manuals and guides, except in GDL reference manual and I quote &lt;BLOCKQUOTE&gt;FM_ is reserved for ArchiFM (e.g. FM_Type)&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt; nothing more, nada, niet, لا شيء&lt;BR /&gt;
3. There were some core similarities between "FM_" prefixed parameters and "COBie".&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
So here are my questions:&lt;BR /&gt;
1. What happened between to the partner solution of ArchiFM ?&lt;BR /&gt;
2. Why modern Graphisoft's literature do not mention anything more about "FM_" parameters ?&lt;BR /&gt;
3. Is there any obscure or practical reason to maintain "FM_" prefixed parameters when we already have "COBie"?&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Thank you in advance&lt;/R&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 2020 11:52:46 GMT</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Nader Belal</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2020-01-08T11:52:46Z</dc:date>
    <item>
      <title>ArchiCAD's Library Parts "FM_" parameters, Facility Management, COBie?</title>
      <link>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/ArchiCAD-s-Library-Parts-quot-FM-quot-parameters-Facility/m-p/284556#M37298</link>
      <description>&lt;DIV class="actalk-migrated-content"&gt;&lt;R&gt;Hi there,&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
This question is for Graphisoft team.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Few days ago, I rescued and old document for GDL standards that was published in year 2000, and I have found out that there few pages that were dedicate to a group of parameters with the "FM_" prefix, that were made specifically for ArchiFM.&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
What have drawn my attention are:&lt;BR /&gt;
1. When ever I want to create a new library part, parameters with the prefix of "FM_" are still available.&lt;BR /&gt;
2. There is nothing written in Graphisoft's modern manuals and guides, except in GDL reference manual and I quote &lt;BLOCKQUOTE&gt;FM_ is reserved for ArchiFM (e.g. FM_Type)&lt;/BLOCKQUOTE&gt; nothing more, nada, niet, لا شيء&lt;BR /&gt;
3. There were some core similarities between "FM_" prefixed parameters and "COBie".&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
So here are my questions:&lt;BR /&gt;
1. What happened between to the partner solution of ArchiFM ?&lt;BR /&gt;
2. Why modern Graphisoft's literature do not mention anything more about "FM_" parameters ?&lt;BR /&gt;
3. Is there any obscure or practical reason to maintain "FM_" prefixed parameters when we already have "COBie"?&lt;BR /&gt;
&lt;BR /&gt;
Thank you in advance&lt;/R&gt;&lt;/DIV&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Jan 2020 11:52:46 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://community.graphisoft.com/t5/Collaboration-with-other/ArchiCAD-s-Library-Parts-quot-FM-quot-parameters-Facility/m-p/284556#M37298</guid>
      <dc:creator>Nader Belal</dc:creator>
      <dc:date>2020-01-08T11:52:46Z</dc:date>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>

