JT is the format fathered by EAI who was later purchased by EDS and
added to the PLM family. The foundation technology was (if memory
serves) Direct Model. It is a "lightweight" representation of the model
and can contain 3D annotation, B-Rep definition and a lot of other
data. On average they are about 20% the size of CAD solid. The closest
match from Autodesk would be AMP. AMP does not have precision geometry
though. They can translate through Inventor R7. It is my understanding
that they do not support R8.
It has been my understanding that the JT format was aging but it looks
like someone is trying to pump new life into it. I know that Immersive
Design was working on a translator to go from JT to thiner format as
well as Streamline. With the JT Open organization, perhaps others will
do the same.
rllthomas wrote:
> You know, I thought I was fairly capable of understanding the english
> language but I can't make much sense of this. From the JT Open FAW:
>
> JT Open is not an attempt to create a standard such as STEP or IGES.
> Those formats address different requirements. JT is a format that is
> tailored for multi-cad data-sharing, based on the high-definition,
> small footprint, visual, and optional exact (Brep) information. JT has
> become a widely used format and its future is driven by the members.
> This approach will allow the JT technology and adoption to advance
> swiftly to meet ever changing market demands.
>
> I think they are just saying lightweight 3D object like the reality
> wave technology Autodesk uses. Anyone else have a different take on this?
>
