Community
Civil 3D Forum
Welcome to Autodesk’s Civil 3D Forums. Share your knowledge, ask questions, and explore popular AutoCAD Civil 3D topics.
cancel
Showing results for 
Show  only  | Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

Ballpark Style Setup times

31 REPLIES 31
Reply
Message 1 of 32
Anonymous
381 Views, 31 Replies

Ballpark Style Setup times

It would help immensely to get a users "read" on how long it takes to set up the different types of Styles in use for C3D. I am aware that there are default Styles provided with the app, but we all have different agency requirements that we must meet. And no two agencies agree on how they want to see the data represented (not even when only a freeway separates them from each other). So could you kind folks inundate me with some ballpark numbers on how long it takes to set up a new Style for use in production from the canned ones provided? Please address Points, Grading, Surfaces, Alignments; whatever is currently a part of the app. I asked this same question of the Dan & Dave show today on the Webcast, so I'm specifically looking to see if you agree with their estimation. Checking practice with theory, you see. TIA, -- Don Reichle "King of Work-Arounds" Ifland Engineers, Inc.
31 REPLIES 31
Message 2 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

I would love to have/see a simply way to update the styles in a outside program (not within Civil 3d) to manger sytles in an external database that could be used to import and setup on the office network. Civil 3d appears to have many more "options" that LD3 had in the prototype settings... Matthew Anderson Joseph A Schudt & Associates anderson@jaseng.com "Don Reichle" wrote in message news:40366f09$1_2@newsprd01... > It would help immensely to get a users "read" on how long it takes to set up > the different types of Styles in use for C3D. I am aware that there are > default Styles provided with the app, but we all have different agency > requirements that we must meet. And no two agencies agree on how they want > to see the data represented (not even when only a freeway separates them > from each other). > > So could you kind folks inundate me with some ballpark numbers on how long > it takes to set up a new Style for use in production from the canned ones > provided? > > Please address Points, Grading, Surfaces, Alignments; whatever is currently > a part of the app. > > I asked this same question of the Dan & Dave show today on the Webcast, so > I'm specifically looking to see if you agree with their estimation. Checking > practice with theory, you see. > > TIA, > -- > Don Reichle > "King of Work-Arounds" > Ifland Engineers, Inc. > >
Message 3 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

If you left me alone with nothing else to do, I estimate that I could spend 3-4 weeks doing nothing but styles. The object styles, those are easy. It's all of the individual label styles that will take _forever_. A style for Left CR, Right CR, OS, No Offset, Vertical OS, CI, etc, etc, etc. The variations on a theme are farily long and endless. Think of all the different ways you label a simple plat, and you see the issue. Now, I DO NOT consider this a problem. It's a do it once, and go on with life issue. That's what CMs are for. My current biggest issue is that there's no way to drop all the styles from a DWT for a given object family (i.e. Surface Labels,) into a target drawing except one at a time. Time consuming as all getout, and that means users won't do it, they'll make it up as they go. -- James Wedding, P.E. IT Manager Jones & Boyd, Inc. Dallas, TX XP/1 on P4-1.6/512 LDT2004+C3D
Message 4 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

It's beginning to sound like they need a reality check before they go much further. What I have seen on the Webcasts so far has been very impressive as far as being able to get a design from concept to production. Lots of great bells and whistles. BUT, if the old cliche` about the last 5% of the project (final drafting) takes 95% of the budget, it may be better to just purchase the upgrade and let it simmer untouched until they wrap up some significant loose ends. I am in favor of adopting what I have seen so far, but it would be more than I could sell to the boss, and then hope to keep my job. All these object oriented and associated improvements are great, but not at the price of production. And how can they keep urging us to get in and get our feet wet, if they know that these issues that adversely affect production are lurking just under the surface of the lagoon like a ravenous Great White. I can hear the "Da-Dum" music now, off in the distance. -- Don Reichle "King of Work-Arounds" Ifland Engineers, Inc. "James Wedding" wrote in message news:403675cd_3@newsprd01... > If you left me alone with nothing else to do, I estimate that I could spend > 3-4 weeks doing nothing but styles. The object styles, those are easy. It's > all of the individual label styles that will take _forever_. A style for > Left CR, Right CR, OS, No Offset, Vertical OS, CI, etc, etc, etc. The > variations on a theme are farily long and endless. Think of all the > different ways you label a simple plat, and you see the issue. > > Now, I DO NOT consider this a problem. It's a do it once, and go on with > life issue. That's what CMs are for. My current biggest issue is that > there's no way to drop all the styles from a DWT for a given object family > (i.e. Surface Labels,) into a target drawing except one at a time. Time > consuming as all getout, and that means users won't do it, they'll make it > up as they go. > > -- > James Wedding, P.E. > IT Manager > Jones & Boyd, Inc. > Dallas, TX > XP/1 on P4-1.6/512 > LDT2004+C3D > >
Message 5 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

James, You have been playing with Civil 3D ( I suspect going back to Vine) longer than most, and you could spend '3-4 weeks on nothing but styles.' How about the rest of us with much less experience. Maybe large firms with a full time CM can do this, but 3-4 weeks is going to kill many small firms. And - we have not even seen roadway or pipe styles yet. This is a real hurdle that AutoDesk is going to have to address if they expect firms to cozy-up to this product. One step AutoDesk can take - is to publish a real, detailed guide on styles. The current help is worthless when it comes to styles. Some style components are self explanatory, but many are not. A written guide would be very thick, explore in detail civil terms exactly what each setting did, and how different settings interact with each other. Or, it could be a visual electronic file, demonstrating exactly what each and every setting does. Without this bible, the CM is going to have to play with each and every style, and various combination of styles (e.g., see Point Layers thread this NG), comparing and re-writing cad standards as he goes. Some people now make money customizing sheet manager in LDD for firms. Perhaps a whole new cottage industry will rise for C3D (but think of the expense). The real problem I see with styles is, that in practice, it is not going to be a 'do it once, and go on with life issue.' You will not be able to just set them up once before you role out the product. Each job is going to be just enough different that styles and standards are going to have to constantly evolve. Each C3D update will introduce new and different styles. Are you going to investigate and setup every possible grading criteria style for every future job, or are going to leave this to each designer? Will users need enough knowledge of styles to make 'child styles' for peculiar drafting detail. Sounds like every firm will need a full time CM devoted to this product. Sounds like users are going to need a little more than minimal style training. Yes, AutoDesk needs to consider a better management and distribution of styles needs to be considered. Under the current scheme, I see the proliferation of the same style with different definitions in every drawing the C3D touches. Whether you use layer scheme or the style scheme, I was amazed at the proliferation of layers in a C3D drawing. Each object sub-component is going to want its own layer. This is going to greatly impact most firms layer standards. And again, each new release of C3D, will require more and more layers. I find the layer management scheme of r2004 and earlier, ill equipped to deal with this concept. Perhaps the layer groups of r2005 will address this. Perhaps the C3D team will see the advantage of C3D styles having a direct hook into layer groups. Perhaps users should wait for the r2005 edition of C3D? So this raises the issue of when does the CM devote the time to style setup. Will time spent now just be wasted when a new releases come out? But you probably cannot really use C3D until you do some style setup. But then we still are in a Preview Edition, and if you do spend the time, C3D is not powerful enough to complete most any design process. I think this is, in the words of another, part of the never-never land that C3D finds itself it in. Being on the leading edge of a new product, is always time expensive, but I see jumping into this product too soon can be REAL expensive. sc "James Wedding" wrote in message news:403675cd_3@newsprd01... > If you left me alone with nothing else to do, I estimate that I could spend > 3-4 weeks doing nothing but styles. The object styles, those are easy. It's > all of the individual label styles that will take _forever_. A style for > Left CR, Right CR, OS, No Offset, Vertical OS, CI, etc, etc, etc. The > variations on a theme are farily long and endless. Think of all the > different ways you label a simple plat, and you see the issue. > > Now, I DO NOT consider this a problem. It's a do it once, and go on with > life issue. That's what CMs are for. My current biggest issue is that > there's no way to drop all the styles from a DWT for a given object family > (i.e. Surface Labels,) into a target drawing except one at a time. Time > consuming as all getout, and that means users won't do it, they'll make it > up as they go. > > -- > James Wedding, P.E. > IT Manager > Jones & Boyd, Inc. > Dallas, TX > XP/1 on P4-1.6/512 > LDT2004+C3D > >
Message 6 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

That's what I appreciate most about you Steve. You can actually think something through to it's natural conclusion, and then articulate your thoughts in a logical manner that enables the reader to draw their own conclusion. Most of the time they end up in agreement, but not always. -- Don Reichle "King of Work-Arounds" Ifland Engineers, Inc. "Steve Cannon" wrote in message news:40368558$1_1@newsprd01... > James, > > You have been playing with Civil 3D ( I suspect going back to Vine) longer > than most, and you could spend '3-4 weeks on nothing but styles.' How about > the rest of us with much less experience. Maybe large firms with a full time > CM can do this, but 3-4 weeks is going to kill many small firms. And - we > have not even seen roadway or pipe styles yet. > > This is a real hurdle that AutoDesk is going to have to address if they > expect firms to cozy-up to this product. One step AutoDesk can take - is to > publish a real, detailed guide on styles. The current help is worthless > when it comes to styles. Some style components are self explanatory, but > many are not. A written guide would be very thick, explore in detail civil > terms exactly what each setting did, and how different settings interact > with each other. Or, it could be a visual electronic file, demonstrating > exactly what each and every setting does. Without this bible, the CM is > going to have to play with each and every style, and various combination of > styles (e.g., see Point Layers thread this NG), comparing and re-writing cad > standards as he goes. Some people now make money customizing sheet manager > in LDD for firms. Perhaps a whole new cottage industry will rise for C3D > (but think of the expense). > > The real problem I see with styles is, that in practice, it is not going to > be a 'do it once, and go on with life issue.' You will not be able to just > set them up once before you role out the product. Each job is going to be > just enough different that styles and standards are going to have to > constantly evolve. Each C3D update will introduce new and different styles. > Are you going to investigate and setup every possible grading criteria style > for every future job, or are going to leave this to each designer? Will > users need enough knowledge of styles to make 'child styles' for peculiar > drafting detail. Sounds like every firm will need a full time CM devoted to > this product. Sounds like users are going to need a little more than minimal > style training. > > Yes, AutoDesk needs to consider a better management and distribution of > styles needs to be considered. Under the current scheme, I see the > proliferation of the same style with different definitions in every drawing > the C3D touches. > > Whether you use layer scheme or the style scheme, I was amazed at the > proliferation of layers in a C3D drawing. Each object sub-component is > going to want its own layer. This is going to greatly impact most firms > layer standards. And again, each new release of C3D, will require more and > more layers. I find the layer management scheme of r2004 and earlier, ill > equipped to deal with this concept. Perhaps the layer groups of r2005 will > address this. Perhaps the C3D team will see the advantage of C3D styles > having a direct hook into layer groups. Perhaps users should wait for the > r2005 edition of C3D? > > So this raises the issue of when does the CM devote the time to style setup. > Will time spent now just be wasted when a new releases come out? But you > probably cannot really use C3D until you do some style setup. But then we > still are in a Preview Edition, and if you do spend the time, C3D is not > powerful enough to complete most any design process. I think this is, in the > words of another, part of the never-never land that C3D finds itself it in. > Being on the leading edge of a new product, is always time expensive, but I > see jumping into this product too soon can be REAL expensive. > > sc > > > > "James Wedding" wrote in message > news:403675cd_3@newsprd01... > > If you left me alone with nothing else to do, I estimate that I could > spend > > 3-4 weeks doing nothing but styles. The object styles, those are easy. > It's > > all of the individual label styles that will take _forever_. A style for > > Left CR, Right CR, OS, No Offset, Vertical OS, CI, etc, etc, etc. The > > variations on a theme are farily long and endless. Think of all the > > different ways you label a simple plat, and you see the issue. > > > > Now, I DO NOT consider this a problem. It's a do it once, and go on with > > life issue. That's what CMs are for. My current biggest issue is that > > there's no way to drop all the styles from a DWT for a given object family > > (i.e. Surface Labels,) into a target drawing except one at a time. Time > > consuming as all getout, and that means users won't do it, they'll make it > > up as they go. > > > > -- > > James Wedding, P.E. > > IT Manager > > Jones & Boyd, Inc. > > Dallas, TX > > XP/1 on P4-1.6/512 > > LDT2004+C3D > > > > > >
Message 7 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

It's not a matter of experience, it's a matter of the types of work we do. We do Commercial, Single-Family, Multi-Family, some Muni, etc. Fairly typical for a mid-size Civil firm I think. I started thinking about the complete use of style to do a set of plans. I don't want to label any easements with dumb text, I plan to use a parcel label style. IMHO, if you label ANYTHING on your plans, you should use a label with a style, not a damned mtext leader. The time I plan to spend will be to cover all the weird uses I have for labels. I'm sure they're fairly typical, but I think you could use MTEXT for much of it as you were evolving the other pieces. There's nothing that says you can't start until you have ALL your styles defined. We're doing a pilot project later this month. I'm going to basically build all the styles on the fly, then push them out to a DWT file for later evaluation. This is the approach that I see working best, and how we'll do it. I just meant that I could spend weeks doing styles and perfecting styles, not that I actually would. Take a simple project. Do it in C3D (as best you can,) and rip out the styles at the end of the job. Start the next job with those styles built, build some more, rip out the entire set at the end of the job. I'd bet that in a short span of jobs, you'll have styles to cover 90% of your work. One more comment: I'm willing to bet that you will begin to see styles traded like hatch patterns, like fonts, etc within the community. We won't share ours (Competitive? Hell yes,) but I bet that you'll be able to buy collections much like you buy blocks for specific industries. Someone will do the work, and will either donate those efforts, or try to reap the financial rewards of it. We discussed this quite a bit during the beta stages; look for guys like K-Tek and Pelican Ink to be the front runners. They haven't told me of any such plans, but it wouldn't shock me in the slightest. (Oh, Pete & Gary, you can send me my royalties check later... ) Just my take, and it's almost (but not quite,) purely hypothetical at this point, just like the Dan & Dave show is. Ask me in a month how much we're using styles, and I will have a better answer. -- James Wedding, P.E. IT Manager Jones & Boyd, Inc. Dallas, TX XP/1 on P4-1.6/512 LDT2004+C3D
Message 8 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Pardon me for butting in. I have posted here a couple of times before, but I mainly use Revit as an architectural engineer. I am trying to learn more about C3D for the civil work we do. It occurs to me that C3D could take a hint from Revit on this one. Revit is fairly similar in the sense that dimension styles, text styles, label styles, tag styles, lineweights, materials, etc all have to be setup in a template. You can go with the default template, but most users create their own. If you want to transfer styles from one project or template to another, you can use the Transfer Project Standards command. It makes it pretty easy to "borrow" standards from other users. I know the developers are on different sides of the country, but it would be nice to see some of the features cross up here. Revit could definitely use some improved site tools! "James Wedding" wrote in message news:403675cd_3@newsprd01... > If you left me alone with nothing else to do, I estimate that I could spend > 3-4 weeks doing nothing but styles. The object styles, those are easy. It's > all of the individual label styles that will take _forever_. A style for > Left CR, Right CR, OS, No Offset, Vertical OS, CI, etc, etc, etc. The > variations on a theme are farily long and endless. Think of all the > different ways you label a simple plat, and you see the issue. > > Now, I DO NOT consider this a problem. It's a do it once, and go on with > life issue. That's what CMs are for. My current biggest issue is that > there's no way to drop all the styles from a DWT for a given object family > (i.e. Surface Labels,) into a target drawing except one at a time. Time > consuming as all getout, and that means users won't do it, they'll make it > up as they go. > > -- > James Wedding, P.E. > IT Manager > Jones & Boyd, Inc. > Dallas, TX > XP/1 on P4-1.6/512 > LDT2004+C3D > >
Message 9 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

James, To implement C3D using your strategy, you need 1) a small project with a pretty charitable budget, and 2) a knowledgeable Cad Manager who is also a P.E.( or at least a skilled designer) and who is also a skilled Cad technician, and 3) an understanding boss. Number two probably describes you, but I doubt that many present day civil firms write up the job description for Cad manager in such terms. Maybe they should. I think that is going to take such a person in each firm to get C3D off the ground. On a side note, I am curious. Are you going to take a C3D layer based or a C3D style based approach to object management? Since r2000, we have had style based plotting (stb), but my experience indicates that almost no civil firms have implemented it (still use ctb). Since C3D will require a substantial re-working of the standards anyway, is it also the time that firms should look at going all the way to stb plotting and really scrap the old standards? sc > We're doing a pilot project later this month. I'm going to > basically build all the styles on the fly, then push them > out to a DWT file for later evaluation.
Message 10 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Hi James, I would see the "default" settings provided with the software will set the drafting style for a large number of small firms. Users will design something and label it with a style. Provided the style displays the necessary data to ensure the project is built correctly and they have no major objections to its appearance, they are likely to plot the drawing and move on. We saw that pattern in Australia, where the default drafting behaviour of a single program essentially set the style that people expected, and despite it's weaknesses, many users have difficulty accepting other software which does not recreate those drafting weaknesses. Your proposed plan of action for a larger firm should work well. Your description of 'someone' creating styles and distributing them is clearly the sort of service we will provide in Australia with the Civil 3D 'AustSupp CD'. In between his various other tasks, Rad has already completed a significant proportion of the work of the creating a set of DWT files for this purpose. -- Laurie Comerford CADApps www.cadapps.com.au "James Wedding" wrote in message news:40368c1d$1_3@newsprd01... > It's not a matter of experience, it's a matter of the types of work we do. > We do Commercial, Single-Family, Multi-Family, some Muni, etc. Fairly > typical for a mid-size Civil firm I think. I started thinking about the > complete use of style to do a set of plans. I don't want to label any > easements with dumb text, I plan to use a parcel label style. IMHO, if you > label ANYTHING on your plans, you should use a label with a style, not a > damned mtext leader. > > The time I plan to spend will be to cover all the weird uses I have for > labels. I'm sure they're fairly typical, but I think you could use MTEXT for > much of it as you were evolving the other pieces. There's nothing that says > you can't start until you have ALL your styles defined. We're doing a pilot > project later this month. I'm going to basically build all the styles on the > fly, then push them out to a DWT file for later evaluation. This is the > approach that I see working best, and how we'll do it. I just meant that I > could spend weeks doing styles and perfecting styles, not that I actually > would. > > Take a simple project. Do it in C3D (as best you can,) and rip out the > styles at the end of the job. Start the next job with those styles built, > build some more, rip out the entire set at the end of the job. I'd bet that > in a short span of jobs, you'll have styles to cover 90% of your work. > > One more comment: I'm willing to bet that you will begin to see styles > traded like hatch patterns, like fonts, etc within the community. We won't > share ours (Competitive? Hell yes,) but I bet that you'll be able to buy > collections much like you buy blocks for specific industries. Someone will > do the work, and will either donate those efforts, or try to reap the > financial rewards of it. We discussed this quite a bit during the beta > stages; look for guys like K-Tek and Pelican Ink to be the front runners. > They haven't told me of any such plans, but it wouldn't shock me in the > slightest. (Oh, Pete & Gary, you can send me my royalties check later... > ) > > Just my take, and it's almost (but not quite,) purely hypothetical at this > point, just like the Dan & Dave show is. Ask me in a month how much we're > using styles, and I will have a better answer. > -- > James Wedding, P.E. > IT Manager > Jones & Boyd, Inc. > Dallas, TX > XP/1 on P4-1.6/512 > LDT2004+C3D > >
Message 11 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Yes it is time to go to style-based plotting (but you are right; most places still use ctb). Style-based plotting will allow us to sort and organise elements according to what they are and what they represent in the project and in the design process. And we won't have to worry any more about whether they are on the right layer for the draftsman to be able to plot them the right "pen width". We still have the ultimate confusion of having layers named "Pen 3" and "Text 03" with no idea what the items are design-wise. Doug Boys "Steve Cannon" wrote in message news:4037888b$1_2@newsprd01... > James, Since r2000, we have had > style based plotting (stb), but my experience indicates that almost no civil > firms have implemented it (still use ctb). Since C3D will require a > substantial re-working of the standards anyway, is it also the time that > firms should look at going all the way to stb plotting and really scrap the > old standards?
Message 12 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Doug, I tend to agree that style based plotting seems to make more sense in C3D than LDT. However, other than the time it takes a company to convert, I see three major obstacles to implementation: 1) Dealing with legacy drawings will require firms to perpetuate a dual management system. 2) Controlling on-off visibility during a session. Users are used to and comfortable with AutoCAD's Layer manager to accomplish this. C3D gives on-off visibility to C3D objects as a function of style, and some grouping controls. Prospector acts somewhat as an object manager, but I see no user interface quite as direct as the traditional layer manager and the associated layer management toolbars such as express tools. Degrading the functionality of these controls without providing equivalent replacement controls would seem like a step backward to most users. 3) Inevitably, as an end-result we are going to see the drawing composition as a mixed bag of C3D objects and traditional AutoCAD objects. Does this mean that a style based approach also means a dual approach to managing attributes such as on-off visibility? I read that James is trying to take the approach to keep AutoCAD objects such as text out of the drawing, replacing text with C3D labels instead. I know why - so he can control how they appear in different rotated viewports. Sounds like is going to warp the intended usage of Parcel label styles to meet his need. If he is successful in accomplishing his goal, he eliminates constraint #3. But what about constraint #2? I am not proffering one method over another, I am just looking for other's takes on the strategy. sc "Doug Boys" wrote in message news:4037db94_1@newsprd01... > Yes it is time to go to style-based plotting (but you are right; most places > still use ctb). > > Style-based plotting will allow us to sort and organise elements according > to what they are and what they represent in the project and in the design > process. And we won't have to worry any more about whether they are on the > right layer for the draftsman to be able to plot them the right "pen width".
Message 13 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Laurie, > I would see the "default" settings provided with > the software will set the drafting style for a large > number of small firms. Maybe that is the way it works in Australia, but not here. The City of Albuquerque has the 4" thick Design Process Manual, which has to be adhered to for every subdivision processed. It describes exact specifications for every text, symbol, line, and sheet composition, right down to the Leroy text size and line width for different elements. It even specifies North arrow rotation. I know that Denver and Phoenix also have manuals that are quite extensive and quite different. I go outside Albuquerque to Bernalillo County, and everything changes. Go up to Santa Fe and it changes again. There is no way I see any style provided in C3D as 'default', out of the box settings that would even come close for any firm around here. sc
Message 14 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Hi Steve, In Victoria, our Sewer Authorities tend to work that way, but Councils who control sub-divisions are far more sensible and flexible. I can see advantages in a fairly common drafting layout process as it must help Contractors interpret drawings when there is consistency in appearance, but one would hope that in the long term interests of a society that Authorities could co-operate in standardising and reducing requirements to meet the level of detail you indicate. -- Laurie Comerford CADApps www.cadapps.com.au "Steve Cannon" wrote in message news:4038ece2_2@newsprd01... > Laurie, > > > I would see the "default" settings provided with > > the software will set the drafting style for a large > > number of small firms. > > Maybe that is the way it works in Australia, but not here. The City of > Albuquerque has the 4" thick Design Process Manual, which has to be adhered > to for every subdivision processed. It describes exact specifications for > every text, symbol, line, and sheet composition, right down to the Leroy > text size and line width for different elements. It even specifies North > arrow rotation. I know that Denver and Phoenix also have manuals that are > quite extensive and quite different. I go outside Albuquerque to Bernalillo > County, and everything changes. Go up to Santa Fe and it changes again. > There is no way I see any style provided in C3D as 'default', out of the box > settings that would even come close for any firm around here. > > sc > >
Message 15 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Laurie; I hate to insert any type of political bent to this thread, but Americans fought the Revolutionary War over a centralized flavor of government, and while it appears that some here would welcome a return to those ways, most of us are individuals, which tend to bleed over into our ways of handling most everything in life. But just get us united against a common enemy and they will soon learn a hard lesson on why we are known as the United States. From the way that municipal agencies who may be only separated from eaach other by a freeway having divergent drafting standards, to all 50 states having a loose affiliation through AASHTO but yet having different regional implementations of said standards. I know that you must have the same type of situation "down under" what with your six (or is it seven, I can't remember) territories have significantly different types of terrain and climate, something like we enjoy here in the USA. --- Don Reichle "King of Work-Arounds" Ifland Engineers, Inc. "Laurie Comerford" wrote in message news:40390959_3@newsprd01... > Hi Steve, > > In Victoria, our Sewer Authorities tend to work that way, but Councils who > control sub-divisions are far more sensible and flexible. > > I can see advantages in a fairly common drafting layout process as it must > help Contractors interpret drawings when there is consistency in appearance, > but one would hope that in the long term interests of a society that > Authorities could co-operate in standardising and reducing requirements to > meet the level of detail you indicate. > > -- > > > Laurie Comerford > CADApps > www.cadapps.com.au > > "Steve Cannon" wrote in message > news:4038ece2_2@newsprd01... > > Laurie, > > > > > I would see the "default" settings provided with > > > the software will set the drafting style for a large > > > number of small firms. > > > > Maybe that is the way it works in Australia, but not here. The City of > > Albuquerque has the 4" thick Design Process Manual, which has to be > adhered > > to for every subdivision processed. It describes exact specifications for > > every text, symbol, line, and sheet composition, right down to the Leroy > > text size and line width for different elements. It even specifies North > > arrow rotation. I know that Denver and Phoenix also have manuals that are > > quite extensive and quite different. I go outside Albuquerque to > Bernalillo > > County, and everything changes. Go up to Santa Fe and it changes again. > > There is no way I see any style provided in C3D as 'default', out of the > box > > settings that would even come close for any firm around here. > > > > sc > > > > > >
Message 16 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Hi all - This is a very interesting and informative trail. Note that we definately review trails such as this to help define future product and program requirements. Here are some things that I've gotten out of the trail... 1. The CAD Manager will (or should) have the primary responsibility for defining the styles used in your organization. 2. We need to make the intial creation of styles easier for the CAD Manager 3. We need to make it easier to add to your style libraries (add new styles, copy/adjust existing styles for new submittal agencies, etc) 4. Make styles more portable (make it easier to move one or more styles) 5. Come up with a solution to handle unique conditions. Styles can be created for what you typically encounter. However, creating a label for a unique situation will take farm more effort than a simple text label. However, simple text labels don't have the same dynamic behavior, etc. 6. Need to focus on better documentation and other resources specifically for those who will be building these styles 7. Need to foster the growth of sharing styles and folks building styles for sale 8. We need to keep the system flexible enough to meet an incredibly diverse range of needs - while making it easy and clear for easy type user! Note - there are bunch of style "feature" requirements that we are aware of and working through. Thanks for the input and feel free to add to this list. Dave S "Don Reichle" wrote in message news:40366f09$1_2@newsprd01... > It would help immensely to get a users "read" on how long it takes to set up > the different types of Styles in use for C3D. I am aware that there are > default Styles provided with the app, but we all have different agency > requirements that we must meet. And no two agencies agree on how they want > to see the data represented (not even when only a freeway separates them > from each other). > > So could you kind folks inundate me with some ballpark numbers on how long > it takes to set up a new Style for use in production from the canned ones > provided? > > Please address Points, Grading, Surfaces, Alignments; whatever is currently > a part of the app. > > I asked this same question of the Dan & Dave show today on the Webcast, so > I'm specifically looking to see if you agree with their estimation. Checking > practice with theory, you see. > > TIA, > -- > Don Reichle > "King of Work-Arounds" > Ifland Engineers, Inc. > >
Message 17 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Well Dave, thanks for outlining most of the things that I don't care for about the direction the product is taking. I've answered each one below. If you would do a sampling through your resellers of the median size of users within a licensed site, my hypothesis is that you would find the result heavily weighted in the five to ten user area. Most of those sites would not have (and maybe could not afford) a Cad Manager to handle the daily tasks of maintaining the network of Styles necessary to keep all the jurisdictions happy in the region they serve. The opinion was raised recently regarding regional standardization of drafting styles. As I said before, we are a nation of individuals, and therefore value our "bubble space". In my earlier analogy the cities of Eugene and Springfield in Oregon are only separated by Interstate 5, but you would never know it by looking at the plans they want the engineers to produce for their approval. To add to the mix then you throw in Lane County and Oregon DOT. All have different standards of linetype, lineweight, text height, data necessary on plans, etc. I'm not sure that my hypothetical majority will embrace the thought of applying the necessary maintenance of Styles as C3D evolves over its lifespan. Here is my take on the list of issues you bring up: 1. As I said most of your user base does not have a Cad Manager, or if they do it's probably the same person that signs all the paychecks. So this is probably not something they want added to their job description. 2. This would help that pill more easily be swallowed. 3. Make the library site-specific instead of dwg file specific, so that changes to styles would cascade throughout the office once implemented without the need to open each and every dwg file where they have been applied. 4. Once the Styles become site-specific this issue would disappear. 5. If the programmers in NH would just develop their own brand of Mtext (Ctext?) that would be dynamic, ala Labels this issue would disappear. 6. Instead of creating a hierarchy of Enlightened Ones, evaluate how to make the creation and maintenance of Styles easy enough for a novice to use. We don't want to be left in ignorance once the Enlightened Ones either die or are lured away by better percs. 7. Since Styles are inherently regional in nature (regions possibly as small as 25 miles) how will Robert Steltman in Canada know anything about what types of Styles I need in Santa Cruz County, CA, and therefore be able to honestly service such a broad clientele? (Just one example) 8. On most dialog boxes there is an Advanced button where you hide the additional flexible options. -- Don Reichle "King of Work-Arounds" Ifland Engineers, Inc. "Dave Simeone" wrote in message news:403a17d3$1_1@newsprd01... > Hi all - This is a very interesting and informative trail. Note that we > definately review trails such as this to help define future product and > program requirements. Here are some things that I've gotten out of the > trail... > > 1. The CAD Manager will (or should) have the primary responsibility for > defining the styles used in your organization. > 2. We need to make the intial creation of styles easier for the CAD Manager > 3. We need to make it easier to add to your style libraries (add new styles, > copy/adjust existing styles for new submittal agencies, etc) > 4. Make styles more portable (make it easier to move one or more styles) > 5. Come up with a solution to handle unique conditions. Styles can be > created for what you typically encounter. However, creating a label for a > unique situation will take farm more effort than a simple text label. > However, simple text labels don't have the same dynamic behavior, etc. > 6. Need to focus on better documentation and other resources specifically > for those who will be building these styles > 7. Need to foster the growth of sharing styles and folks building styles for > sale > 8. We need to keep the system flexible enough to meet an incredibly diverse > range of needs - while making it easy and clear for easy type user! > > Note - there are bunch of style "feature" requirements that we are aware of > and working through. > > Thanks for the input and feel free to add to this list. > Dave S > > "Don Reichle" wrote in message > news:40366f09$1_2@newsprd01... > > It would help immensely to get a users "read" on how long it takes to set > up > > the different types of Styles in use for C3D. I am aware that there are > > default Styles provided with the app, but we all have different agency > > requirements that we must meet. And no two agencies agree on how they want > > to see the data represented (not even when only a freeway separates them > > from each other). > > > > So could you kind folks inundate me with some ballpark numbers on how long > > it takes to set up a new Style for use in production from the canned ones > > provided? > > > > Please address Points, Grading, Surfaces, Alignments; whatever is > currently > > a part of the app. > > > > I asked this same question of the Dan & Dave show today on the Webcast, so > > I'm specifically looking to see if you agree with their estimation. > Checking > > practice with theory, you see. > > > > TIA, > > -- > > Don Reichle > > "King of Work-Arounds" > > Ifland Engineers, Inc. > > > > > >
Message 18 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Hi, It would seem to me that there is at least a possibility that these dictatorial local "I will do exactly as I like and insist you do it too" organisations you advocate will love styles and will create their own to ensure consistency of output from their system. Once the style exists, provided that the style can be imported into a drawing, it wont matter what the drawing submitter sends them. In fact maybe all the Authority needs is to receive the LandXML file and then they can get any reports they need in the exact format they need. Development thoughts: Create a mechanism to "batch import" a "style template" to all drawings in a directory. Create very good documentation to make it easy to learn how to create the "Style template" -- Laurie Comerford CADApps www.cadapps.com.au "Don Reichle" wrote in message news:403a4f1c_1@newsprd01... > Well Dave, thanks for outlining most of the things that I don't care for > about the direction the product is taking. I've answered each one below. > > If you would do a sampling through your resellers of the median size of > users within a licensed site, my hypothesis is that you would find the > result heavily weighted in the five to ten user area. Most of those sites > would not have (and maybe could not afford) a Cad Manager to handle the > daily tasks of maintaining the network of Styles necessary to keep all the > jurisdictions happy in the region they serve. > > The opinion was raised recently regarding regional standardization of > drafting styles. As I said before, we are a nation of individuals, and > therefore value our "bubble space". In my earlier analogy the cities of > Eugene and Springfield in Oregon are only separated by Interstate 5, but you > would never know it by looking at the plans they want the engineers to > produce for their approval. To add to the mix then you throw in Lane County > and Oregon DOT. All have different standards of linetype, lineweight, text > height, data necessary on plans, etc. > > I'm not sure that my hypothetical majority will embrace the thought of > applying the necessary maintenance of Styles as C3D evolves over its > lifespan. > > Here is my take on the list of issues you bring up: > 1. As I said most of your user base does not have a Cad Manager, or if they > do it's probably the same person that signs all the paychecks. So this is > probably not something they want added to their job description. > 2. This would help that pill more easily be swallowed. > 3. Make the library site-specific instead of dwg file specific, so that > changes to styles would cascade throughout the office once implemented > without the need to open each and every dwg file where they have been > applied. > 4. Once the Styles become site-specific this issue would disappear. > 5. If the programmers in NH would just develop their own brand of Mtext > (Ctext?) that would be dynamic, ala Labels this issue would disappear. > 6. Instead of creating a hierarchy of Enlightened Ones, evaluate how to make > the creation and maintenance of Styles easy enough for a novice to use. We > don't want to be left in ignorance once the Enlightened Ones either die or > are lured away by better percs. > 7. Since Styles are inherently regional in nature (regions possibly as small > as 25 miles) how will Robert Steltman in Canada know anything about what > types of Styles I need in Santa Cruz County, CA, and therefore be able to > honestly service such a broad clientele? (Just one example) > 8. On most dialog boxes there is an Advanced button where you hide the > additional flexible options. > -- > Don Reichle > "King of Work-Arounds" > Ifland Engineers, Inc. > > "Dave Simeone" wrote in message > news:403a17d3$1_1@newsprd01... > > Hi all - This is a very interesting and informative trail. Note that we > > definately review trails such as this to help define future product and > > program requirements. Here are some things that I've gotten out of the > > trail... > > > > 1. The CAD Manager will (or should) have the primary responsibility for > > defining the styles used in your organization. > > 2. We need to make the intial creation of styles easier for the CAD > Manager > > 3. We need to make it easier to add to your style libraries (add new > styles, > > copy/adjust existing styles for new submittal agencies, etc) > > 4. Make styles more portable (make it easier to move one or more styles) > > 5. Come up with a solution to handle unique conditions. Styles can be > > created for what you typically encounter. However, creating a label for a > > unique situation will take farm more effort than a simple text label. > > However, simple text labels don't have the same dynamic behavior, etc. > > 6. Need to focus on better documentation and other resources specifically > > for those who will be building these styles > > 7. Need to foster the growth of sharing styles and folks building styles > for > > sale > > 8. We need to keep the system flexible enough to meet an incredibly > diverse > > range of needs - while making it easy and clear for easy type user! > > > > Note - there are bunch of style "feature" requirements that we are aware > of > > and working through. > > > > Thanks for the input and feel free to add to this list. > > Dave S > > > > "Don Reichle" wrote in message > > news:40366f09$1_2@newsprd01... > > > It would help immensely to get a users "read" on how long it takes to > set > > up > > > the different types of Styles in use for C3D. I am aware that there are > > > default Styles provided with the app, but we all have different agency > > > requirements that we must meet. And no two agencies agree on how they > want > > > to see the data represented (not even when only a freeway separates them > > > from each other). > > > > > > So could you kind folks inundate me with some ballpark numbers on how > long > > > it takes to set up a new Style for use in production from the canned > ones > > > provided? > > > > > > Please address Points, Grading, Surfaces, Alignments; whatever is > > currently > > > a part of the app. > > > > > > I asked this same question of the Dan & Dave show today on the Webcast, > so > > > I'm specifically looking to see if you agree with their estimation. > > Checking > > > practice with theory, you see. > > > > > > TIA, > > > -- > > > Don Reichle > > > "King of Work-Arounds" > > > Ifland Engineers, Inc. > > > > > > > > > > > >
Message 19 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Not to rain on your parade Laurie but I hope the idea is to have the core developers change the code to what we want, instead of taking what they give us and writing creative code to get what we want. It seems that they actually want to listen at the moment, so that's why we are trying so vociferously to swing them over to the thought of Site-Specific Styles, instead of Dwg-Specific Styles. Unless you really appreciate creating code to batch the process into all the dwgs in a folder, it seems to me far easier to have the changes react to a System Style. That way you no longer need wonder if the current standards have been applied to that project. As much as I am proud to wear the self-imposed title, I would gladly step down in favor of an application that responded to my requests in a timely manner. -- Don Reichle "King of Work-Arounds" Ifland Engineers, Inc. "Laurie Comerford" wrote in message news:403a62ce_1@newsprd01... > Hi, > > It would seem to me that there is at least a possibility that these > dictatorial local "I will do exactly as I like and insist you do it too" > organisations you advocate will love styles and will create their own to > ensure consistency of output from their system. > > Once the style exists, provided that the style can be imported into a > drawing, it wont matter what the drawing submitter sends them. > > In fact maybe all the Authority needs is to receive the LandXML file and > then they can get any reports they need in the exact format they need. > > Development thoughts: > Create a mechanism to "batch import" a "style template" to all drawings in a > directory. > Create very good documentation to make it easy to learn how to create the > "Style template" > -- > > > Laurie Comerford > CADApps > www.cadapps.com.au > > > > "Don Reichle" wrote in message > news:403a4f1c_1@newsprd01... > > Well Dave, thanks for outlining most of the things that I don't care for > > about the direction the product is taking. I've answered each one below. > > > > If you would do a sampling through your resellers of the median size of > > users within a licensed site, my hypothesis is that you would find the > > result heavily weighted in the five to ten user area. Most of those sites > > would not have (and maybe could not afford) a Cad Manager to handle the > > daily tasks of maintaining the network of Styles necessary to keep all the > > jurisdictions happy in the region they serve. > > > > The opinion was raised recently regarding regional standardization of > > drafting styles. As I said before, we are a nation of individuals, and > > therefore value our "bubble space". In my earlier analogy the cities of > > Eugene and Springfield in Oregon are only separated by Interstate 5, but > you > > would never know it by looking at the plans they want the engineers to > > produce for their approval. To add to the mix then you throw in Lane > County > > and Oregon DOT. All have different standards of linetype, lineweight, text > > height, data necessary on plans, etc. > > > > I'm not sure that my hypothetical majority will embrace the thought of > > applying the necessary maintenance of Styles as C3D evolves over its > > lifespan. > > > > Here is my take on the list of issues you bring up: > > 1. As I said most of your user base does not have a Cad Manager, or if > they > > do it's probably the same person that signs all the paychecks. So this is > > probably not something they want added to their job description. > > 2. This would help that pill more easily be swallowed. > > 3. Make the library site-specific instead of dwg file specific, so that > > changes to styles would cascade throughout the office once implemented > > without the need to open each and every dwg file where they have been > > applied. > > 4. Once the Styles become site-specific this issue would disappear. > > 5. If the programmers in NH would just develop their own brand of Mtext > > (Ctext?) that would be dynamic, ala Labels this issue would disappear. > > 6. Instead of creating a hierarchy of Enlightened Ones, evaluate how to > make > > the creation and maintenance of Styles easy enough for a novice to use. We > > don't want to be left in ignorance once the Enlightened Ones either die or > > are lured away by better percs. > > 7. Since Styles are inherently regional in nature (regions possibly as > small > > as 25 miles) how will Robert Steltman in Canada know anything about what > > types of Styles I need in Santa Cruz County, CA, and therefore be able to > > honestly service such a broad clientele? (Just one example) > > 8. On most dialog boxes there is an Advanced button where you hide the > > additional flexible options. > > -- > > Don Reichle > > "King of Work-Arounds" > > Ifland Engineers, Inc. > > > > "Dave Simeone" wrote in message > > news:403a17d3$1_1@newsprd01... > > > Hi all - This is a very interesting and informative trail. Note that we > > > definately review trails such as this to help define future product and > > > program requirements. Here are some things that I've gotten out of the > > > trail... > > > > > > 1. The CAD Manager will (or should) have the primary responsibility for > > > defining the styles used in your organization. > > > 2. We need to make the intial creation of styles easier for the CAD > > Manager > > > 3. We need to make it easier to add to your style libraries (add new > > styles, > > > copy/adjust existing styles for new submittal agencies, etc) > > > 4. Make styles more portable (make it easier to move one or more styles) > > > 5. Come up with a solution to handle unique conditions. Styles can be > > > created for what you typically encounter. However, creating a label for > a > > > unique situation will take farm more effort than a simple text label. > > > However, simple text labels don't have the same dynamic behavior, etc. > > > 6. Need to focus on better documentation and other resources > specifically > > > for those who will be building these styles > > > 7. Need to foster the growth of sharing styles and folks building styles > > for > > > sale > > > 8. We need to keep the system flexible enough to meet an incredibly > > diverse > > > range of needs - while making it easy and clear for easy type user! > > > > > > Note - there are bunch of style "feature" requirements that we are aware > > of > > > and working through. > > > > > > Thanks for the input and feel free to add to this list. > > > Dave S > > > > > > "Don Reichle" wrote in message > > > news:40366f09$1_2@newsprd01... > > > > It would help immensely to get a users "read" on how long it takes to > > set > > > up > > > > the different types of Styles in use for C3D. I am aware that there > are > > > > default Styles provided with the app, but we all have different agency > > > > requirements that we must meet. And no two agencies agree on how they > > want > > > > to see the data represented (not even when only a freeway separates > them > > > > from each other). > > > > > > > > So could you kind folks inundate me with some ballpark numbers on how > > long > > > > it takes to set up a new Style for use in production from the canned > > ones > > > > provided? > > > > > > > > Please address Points, Grading, Surfaces, Alignments; whatever is > > > currently > > > > a part of the app. > > > > > > > > I asked this same question of the Dan & Dave show today on the > Webcast, > > so > > > > I'm specifically looking to see if you agree with their estimation. > > > Checking > > > > practice with theory, you see. > > > > > > > > TIA, > > > > -- > > > > Don Reichle > > > > "King of Work-Arounds" > > > > Ifland Engineers, Inc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
Message 20 of 32
Anonymous
in reply to: Anonymous

Hi, > dictatorial local "I will do exactly as I like and insist you do it too" I like that :) I believe it is not only about setting up standards and styles, I think it may be much more than that, a new milestone in design process, so it is no wonder a resistance is inevitable. There was a time when manual (pen and paper) drafting was turning into computer aided design. There were believers in that new technology and those who were skeptic at least, or firm believers it wouldn't ever pick up. It seems that computer aided design, as we know it, has reached its saturation point. It became tedious to do stuff 'manually' in CAD over and over again. There has been a significant amount of years of experience accumulated about how things are done, and how they can be done more efficiently (with smart objects and styles). And as history repeats itself there are people who accept it immediately, who accept it after a while, and those who will maybe never accept it. It would not be surprising that due to new technologies and procedures currently available, Tool Palettes, new Sheet Sets and tables in AutoCAD 2005, LandXML, GIS, portable devices, more frequently heard model exchanging as opposed to paper exchanging, etc. companies may need to re-think they entire CAD(/GIS) setups to gain full advantage of all. It may end up not by setting up Styles only. And that may take some time. Even more time than what James suggested (3-4 weeks, BTW I admire him to say something like that out loud. Very few would dare say such thing, and everyone else would scream on that as financially non justifiable). Also, it would really be curious to find out a results of "sampling through (autodesk's) resellers of the median size of users within a licensed site". My hypothesis is that companies will come to conclusion sooner or later, that a sophisticated Cad Manager (is PE, is skilled designer, is an understanding boss, and even have some programming skills) will become more of a necessity not a question of affordability. Once Civil3D becomes alive a skilled Cad Manager and a handful of skilled and strongly CAD oriented designers could replace a whole army of 'regular' designers and drafters, and thus probably justifying their cost. Anyway, next 2 years will be interesting. Thanks, -- Strah @ Langan "Laurie Comerford" wrote in message news:403a62ce_1@newsprd01... > Hi, > > It would seem to me that there is at least a possibility that these > dictatorial local "I will do exactly as I like and insist you do it too" > organisations you advocate will love styles and will create their own to > ensure consistency of output from their system. > > Once the style exists, provided that the style can be imported into a > drawing, it wont matter what the drawing submitter sends them. > > In fact maybe all the Authority needs is to receive the LandXML file and > then they can get any reports they need in the exact format they need. > > Development thoughts: > Create a mechanism to "batch import" a "style template" to all drawings in a > directory. > Create very good documentation to make it easy to learn how to create the > "Style template" > -- > > > Laurie Comerford > CADApps > www.cadapps.com.au > > > > "Don Reichle" wrote in message > news:403a4f1c_1@newsprd01... > > Well Dave, thanks for outlining most of the things that I don't care for > > about the direction the product is taking. I've answered each one below. > > > > If you would do a sampling through your resellers of the median size of > > users within a licensed site, my hypothesis is that you would find the > > result heavily weighted in the five to ten user area. Most of those sites > > would not have (and maybe could not afford) a Cad Manager to handle the > > daily tasks of maintaining the network of Styles necessary to keep all the > > jurisdictions happy in the region they serve. > > > > The opinion was raised recently regarding regional standardization of > > drafting styles. As I said before, we are a nation of individuals, and > > therefore value our "bubble space". In my earlier analogy the cities of > > Eugene and Springfield in Oregon are only separated by Interstate 5, but > you > > would never know it by looking at the plans they want the engineers to > > produce for their approval. To add to the mix then you throw in Lane > County > > and Oregon DOT. All have different standards of linetype, lineweight, text > > height, data necessary on plans, etc. > > > > I'm not sure that my hypothetical majority will embrace the thought of > > applying the necessary maintenance of Styles as C3D evolves over its > > lifespan. > > > > Here is my take on the list of issues you bring up: > > 1. As I said most of your user base does not have a Cad Manager, or if > they > > do it's probably the same person that signs all the paychecks. So this is > > probably not something they want added to their job description. > > 2. This would help that pill more easily be swallowed. > > 3. Make the library site-specific instead of dwg file specific, so that > > changes to styles would cascade throughout the office once implemented > > without the need to open each and every dwg file where they have been > > applied. > > 4. Once the Styles become site-specific this issue would disappear. > > 5. If the programmers in NH would just develop their own brand of Mtext > > (Ctext?) that would be dynamic, ala Labels this issue would disappear. > > 6. Instead of creating a hierarchy of Enlightened Ones, evaluate how to > make > > the creation and maintenance of Styles easy enough for a novice to use. We > > don't want to be left in ignorance once the Enlightened Ones either die or > > are lured away by better percs. > > 7. Since Styles are inherently regional in nature (regions possibly as > small > > as 25 miles) how will Robert Steltman in Canada know anything about what > > types of Styles I need in Santa Cruz County, CA, and therefore be able to > > honestly service such a broad clientele? (Just one example) > > 8. On most dialog boxes there is an Advanced button where you hide the > > additional flexible options. > > -- > > Don Reichle > > "King of Work-Arounds" > > Ifland Engineers, Inc. > > > > "Dave Simeone" wrote in message > > news:403a17d3$1_1@newsprd01... > > > Hi all - This is a very interesting and informative trail. Note that we > > > definately review trails such as this to help define future product and > > > program requirements. Here are some things that I've gotten out of the > > > trail... > > > > > > 1. The CAD Manager will (or should) have the primary responsibility for > > > defining the styles used in your organization. > > > 2. We need to make the intial creation of styles easier for the CAD > > Manager > > > 3. We need to make it easier to add to your style libraries (add new > > styles, > > > copy/adjust existing styles for new submittal agencies, etc) > > > 4. Make styles more portable (make it easier to move one or more styles) > > > 5. Come up with a solution to handle unique conditions. Styles can be > > > created for what you typically encounter. However, creating a label for > a > > > unique situation will take farm more effort than a simple text label. > > > However, simple text labels don't have the same dynamic behavior, etc. > > > 6. Need to focus on better documentation and other resources > specifically > > > for those who will be building these styles > > > 7. Need to foster the growth of sharing styles and folks building styles > > for > > > sale > > > 8. We need to keep the system flexible enough to meet an incredibly > > diverse > > > range of needs - while making it easy and clear for easy type user! > > > > > > Note - there are bunch of style "feature" requirements that we are aware > > of > > > and working through. > > > > > > Thanks for the input and feel free to add to this list. > > > Dave S > > > > > > "Don Reichle" wrote in message > > > news:40366f09$1_2@newsprd01... > > > > It would help immensely to get a users "read" on how long it takes to > > set > > > up > > > > the different types of Styles in use for C3D. I am aware that there > are > > > > default Styles provided with the app, but we all have different agency > > > > requirements that we must meet. And no two agencies agree on how they > > want > > > > to see the data represented (not even when only a freeway separates > them > > > > from each other). > > > > > > > > So could you kind folks inundate me with some ballpark numbers on how > > long > > > > it takes to set up a new Style for use in production from the canned > > ones > > > > provided? > > > > > > > > Please address Points, Grading, Surfaces, Alignments; whatever is > > > currently > > > > a part of the app. > > > > > > > > I asked this same question of the Dan & Dave show today on the > Webcast, > > so > > > > I'm specifically looking to see if you agree with their estimation. > > > Checking > > > > practice with theory, you see. > > > > > > > > TIA, > > > > -- > > > > Don Reichle > > > > "King of Work-Arounds" > > > > Ifland Engineers, Inc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >

Can't find what you're looking for? Ask the community or share your knowledge.

Post to forums  

Rail Community


Autodesk Design & Make Report