Opacity control

[mac_ito]

Hi, why feature opacity control is not available for inserted components?

I know it's because it's related, but what I would like to know is why it works like this, and what is the reason for choosing it?

thx.

[evanp4509U4JZ]

I believe the problem is with it being "linked". There are several things that you can't do to a linked component. 

[mac_ito]

thank you, I completed my first message to be more explicit

[jeff_strater]

Because it is a change to the design itself.  That is:  Opacity is stored in the design, so a change requires write access to that design.  Visibility or Appearance can be overridden in the referencing design, but not Opacity.

[mac_ito]

thank's for this comment

If I understand correctly this is therefore a developer problem. If the user wants to have this functionality he must design differently or is there an alternative?

[jeff_strater]

I don't think I understand your question.  To change opacity you have to be editing the design which owns the component or body which you want to change.  Either Edit in Place, or edit the design in another tab.  That is the workflow to change an object, whether it is to add a fillet or to change opacity.  

[mac_ito]

Hi,

You understood correctly. I also understood your logic well, which is not from the user's point of view.

The opacity should only behave like a mesh. It is a one-off need, in a context, not necessarily definitive.

Modify the opacity with Edit in place > how do you do it, at home I don't have this choice

[laughingcreek]

personal licensees don't have the edit in place functionality.

[mac_ito]

I do not have a personal license but a subscription

it is visible on the thumbnail of the video and at best watch 10s of the video..

[laughingcreek]

gaa. still working on my first cup of coffee.

yeah, no opacity control will editing in place.  weird.

[jeff_strater]

Sorry, you are correct, apparently.  Each command has to be specifically implemented to work with Edit in Place, and so, I guess, Opacity has not been implemented.  The team keeps adding to the list, but this one has not made it yet.  So, you will have to edit Opacity by opening the design in a separate tab.

I'm not exactly sure what "The opacity should only behave like a mesh" means.  But, for now, yes, Opacity remains a design change, and so must be made in the owning design.

[kb9ydn]

---

@jeff_strater wrote:

Sorry, you are correct, apparently.  Each command has to be specifically implemented to work with Edit in Place, and so, I guess, Opacity has not been implemented.  The team keeps adding to the list, but this one has not made it yet.  So, you will have to edit Opacity by opening the design in a separate tab.

I'm not exactly sure what "The opacity should only behave like a mesh" means.  But, for now, yes, Opacity remains a design change, and so must be made in the owning design.

---

There REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY needs to be a quick way to toggle transparency of components at an assembly level, that isn't considered a design change.  Just like there is a show/hide, there needs to be a make transparent.  It is invaluable when working with assemblies to be able to see through selected components to see what is going on inside.  Section analysis is good sometimes but most of the time component transparency is much better.

C|

[mac_ito]

When using fusion you have to be patient.. developers take months to correct bugs in new versions and years to implement new features when they are previously validated.