PLOTMAKER REVISION/IUSSE NUMBERING

[Anonymous]

Idea I have for plotmaker 10 is to have an extra data entry point under the layout name for each sheet in the properties section of the navigator. see attached image for better understanding.

Then in the Title block use AUTOTEXT for the revision/issue.

Maybe in the Tree by Subsets the layout sheets use an extendsion of some sort similar to the layer settings with in archicad.

eg. 11 DETAILS (FOLDER)
11.1 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS /A (NAME OF LAYOUT SHEET WITH REVSION NUMBER-LETTER)

[Rob]

brendon,

unfortunately, it's a long standing wish...

more at:

http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?p=25675&highlight=issue#25675

and

http://archicad-talk.graphisoft.com/viewtopic.php?p=17281&highlight=#17281

BTW I just wonder who has voted 'not needed' !!?, could that person(s) explain what system are they using for dwgs organisation/records (apart from hardcopies storage)? seriously, this is a big issue at least in AU especially in the construction documentation stage, well, actually in all stages of a project.

[Anonymous]

Rod,

Thanks for the treads. I only found this image yesterday as I was transferring data from my old hard drive to my new one. Yes I was aware of the second tread which prompted me to come up with the graphic for Plotmaker many months ago but never got around to posting it up.

Yes I too would like to know how the person who voted NO is keeping track of issues/revisions of their documentation.

Brendon

[__archiben]

guys

i haven't voted on this yet, and the person who voted 'not needed' should really explain themselves too, but i do sort of agree with them. . .

for what it's worth and at the risk of causing offence, i think that what you're proposing is actaully quite a short-sighted solution. i think this needs a high and accurate degree of automation - particularly for large projects with many people working on them. simply typing your revision letter in a box doesn't work when there are many people all doing the same: mistakes can and will be made this way.

there are many revision control software solutions available and are usually found in high-end, bespoke engineering solutions and sofware development packages. this type of revision control needs to be built into the archiCAD publisher, in my opinion, for a 100%, right-first-time solution for graphisoft . . . not a 20%, scissors-and-cellotape job to tide us over.

don't get me wrong: revision control is an extremely important aspect of the software that is currently lacking. but let's aim high first, eh?

~/archiben

[Aussie John]

yes I voted essential for a revison system. One which the published doco lists too. An auto matic with manual override sounds good to me.

Great to see your face Ben. Couldnt you find a tree or something in Sydeny to hide behind? or have you done a "face off"

[Anonymous]

~/archiben wrote:
for large projects with many people working on them. simply typing your revision letter in a box doesn't work when there are many people all doing the same: mistakes can and will be made this way.

... this type of revision control needs to be built into the archiCAD publisher, in my opinion, for a 100%, right-first-time solution for graphisoft . . .

... revision control is an extremely important aspect of the software that is currently lacking. but let's aim high first, eh?

My sentiments, exactly. Hey, the intention of this wish is right... but I agree with Ben's assessment of the suggested implementation.

Woody

[Anonymous]

I agree that a revision system or/and alternative solutions system is a must for any cad system

Revision system tracks changes
Alternative system tracks alternative solutions.

Both can be simulated by a suitable system layer but this is not a viable solution for large and complex projects.

In an alternate solutions system i could have for example a list of entries like
a) Window on the west elevation (pressing it will , like a tree-subtree component, open the proposed solutions, and then selecting will change the window to the desired one.
b) East elevation (this could be an entry with 3-4-10 different proposed solutions.. )

and so on.

In its current state i cannot create multiple alternative solutions to propose to a client, and make a presentation.

So i definately vote essential for a revision/solutions system

[__archiben]

Aussie wrote:
Great to see your face Ben. Couldnt you find a tree or something in Sydeny to hide behind? or have you done a "face off"

yeah - it's actually link in the picture, right karl?

~/archiben

[__archiben]

by the way - i've voted 'essential' on this for the sentiment! would the 'not needed' guys please stand up?!

~/archiben

[Anonymous]

I voted not needed for the reasons I stated above. That being said, I did add that the intention is good... just not as proposed.

Woody