The Global Archicad Community

Stay informed. Get help. Share your knowledge.

Discussions closely related to Archicad. (Example: Do we need a Linux version of Archicad?)

Moderators: Karl Ottenstein, LaszloNagy, ejrolon, Barry Kelly, gkmethy, mtron, mnguyen, Csaba Kézér

#316534
@Jp1138

I do not have the answer for that question, may be better for you to ask the port authorities directly.

But what I meant in the previous comment is to shine some light on the fact that:
  1. Some organisations may no other solution but to use specific vendor specific platforms
  2. There is practically no use of using IFC deliveries if they will put the condition of delivering the original digital files
Just imagine, that I have won that tender, and I have created the required BIM objects as ArchiCAD's GSM library parts, which are functional, compliant with the required standards, and parametric, but how will they use them under their specific conditions !!!!

And what do you think that they will ask afterwords !!!!

I have the documents if you want to check them
#316536
@Moonlight

Yes. In this very specific situation there is no solution than call for proprietary format.
But I think Jp1138 was referring to Architecture Permit procedure. Where the files will only be reviewed by local authorities. In this case, I think IFC is a practical and legal solution for the matter.
#316537
I think IFC files were of no use to them in this particular case the way you describe it, so they should have asked for what they needed. As you say, had you given them IFC and Archicad files, they would have to convert them if the want to use them as parametric objects. Should they make another tender or would they do this work in office? It makes no sense. I suppose you wouldn´t have won the tender in the first place weren´t you using RVT files.

There´s no solution in this case, I´m afraid.
#316539
Braza wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 6:32 pm
@Moonlight

Yes. In this very specific situation there is no solution than call for proprietary format.
But I think Jp1138 was referring to Architecture Permit procedure. Where the files will only be reviewed by local authorities. In this case, I think IFC is a practical and legal solution for the matter.
Yes, that´s what I meant. There are many cases where IFC files are good enough, and some like this one where I think they would be of little use.
#316544
Just to put my saying into context.

They didn't specify what original vendor specific file format as a deliverable, cause as the Barcelona Sea Port is a public entity, they must follow European Norms and Orders. They only asked to be delivered to them with the IFC files.

But they mentioned, Revit as an Example.

So legally, you could have given them the GSM files ... [/b]

But on the other hand I wanted to show here an example of how the laws and procedures can be bended/twisted in one direction or another.
#316576
Moonlight wrote:
Mon Sep 14, 2020 7:56 pm

But on the other hand I wanted to show here an example of how the laws and procedures can be bended/twisted in one direction or another.[/color]

Yes, every law can be twisted around to a point you may gain nothing fighting it. Public administration must "believe" in the law it is enforced to apply, otherwise it will be for nothing.
#316600
Moonlight wrote:But on the other hand I wanted to show here an example of how the laws and procedures can be bended/twisted in one direction or another.
Very true. This is why the role of Regulators is so important. To prevent unfair commercial practices, specially by the industry giants. (And lately EU is doing a very good job in this matter) Unfortunately, local governments are pretty much permeable to these kind of practices. Governments should do what they are mandated for, which is: Always look for the Public Interest and a fair trade environment.
  • 1
  • 16
  • 17
  • 18
  • 19
  • 20