Hello,
I have been thinking about whether this is an important issue or not.
Karl wrote:
"Or have untold numbers of construction documents been sent out around the world with
incorrect information, especially if the cut was dimensioned...?!"
I wrote:
"To me, unless someone can explain why this is correct, this is a serious issue."
The FPCP in the days of paper and pencil drafting was an arbitrary convention for presenting
an understandable floor plan. One could even joggle the "cut plane" up and down for clarity.
For example, in the furniture plan, the doors and windows appeared to be cut at about 6'-0" from the floor
but the grandfather clock in the corner was not sawed off at 6'-0" and
drawn showing a cut through the pendulum arm and the weight chains
but was drawn showing the top view at about 7'-6".
As of AC 10, there is now this absolutely literal sense of the concept
of the floor plan "cut plane" where it is no longer a graphical convention
but a drawing of a view of the walls, roofs, beam, etc sawed off at a certain
height from the floor and elements or parts of elements above this plane
are indicated by dashed lines .
In either case, as far as I can tell, it never was, or is, necessary, important, needed, or logical, in any context,
to measure anything from an edge of this cut plane representation.
Therefor, I withdraw my comment and suggest, perhaps, that Graphisoft eliminate the hotspots from the corners of the cutplane rectangle
for all of the tools that can be inclined relative to horizontal.
I understand that all tools should be consistent in there representation of the cutplane to eliminate confusion.
I say "perhaps" because one of the things I appreciate about AC is that this application is not autocratic.
If you want to do something, maybe stupid from some other point of view, AC does not disallow you from doing so.
If anyone knows why there is a necessity to measure from
the edge, center, etc of the cutplane, please explain this to me.
I clearly need to know.
Thank you,
Peter Devlin
Rubia Torres
