Is Top down workflow practical with Fusion

[stevec781]

With Solid edges push to convert SW users due to the impending kernel change I have been watching Matt Lombards blog on how he is moving towards solid edge, and their synchronous technology has got me thinking about how to get the most out of Fusion.  But seeing as though its not integrated into Inventor I cant think of how it can be effectively used in top down workflow when a lot of editing and creating is done from within the assembly.  ST can have interpart relationships making it look as though its a fast and effcient workflow with minimal rebuild times.  Is anyone using Fusion in this way?

[JDMather]

While I have every confidence that Matt and Kevin can model precise geometry with a history-free modeler, I shudder to think what happens if this technology gets adopted by a large user-base. 

[stevec781]

From what I can see the main difference is that in history based modelling you dimension and relate geometry at the sketch level, whereas with the ST workflow they capture design intent by dimensioning and relating faces and edges of the solid.  Both ways capture design intent, but ST & fusion do it without history rebuild overhead - perfect.  How you get to those final faces and edges doesnt matter as long as critical relationships and dimensions are maintained.  It seems that Fusion, SE and Spaceclaim all have the same approach, except I cant see how to use fusion from within an assembly.