Hey Mia;
That would undermine the entire process, and likely contribute to the end of
the universe as we know it.
I don't know about the other folks here, but I'm happy with the current
state of the product. We get to give feedback which more than likely makes
into at least the next release, if not the next Service Pack. And there have
been times where we are actually asked for input. The post entitled
"Setbacks for Typical Lots" is an off-shoot of just such a request of about
2-3 months ago. While it appears from the thread developing that it stills
needs fine-tuning, I would say that its inclusion in such a short time frame
speaks volumes.
I'm sure you'll likely point to the fact that I don't even have the product
currently, and while that is true, the development team has an ear out to
even those still in the "gallery" for input. That's a reflection on the
level of commitment to this product by the Deskers that has reached a height
not enjoyed by its predecessor.
[noise of soapbox being stored away for next use] 🙂
--
Don Reichle
"King Of Work-Arounds"
"The only thing worse
than training your staff,
and having them leave is -
not training your staff,
and having them stay."
Courtesy Graphics Solution Providers
--------------------------------------
LDT3/CD3
IntelP4-2.4
1GB RAM
Intel 64MB
wrote in message news:4838881@discussion.autodesk.com...
If we are going to have a ROW parcel that is based on the location of an
alignment shouldn't the ROW parcel and any child parcels update if the
alignment the ROW is based on is edited?
This is another example of inconsistency with the program. If Autodesk
can't get right yet, hold off on it until it is complete. You are sending
mixed messages to users.
Mia