The Global ARCHICAD Community

[Geoffroy Magnan]

Like AutoCAD's function to edit external blocks in the current drawing :
You access the module and everything outside the module gets greyed out and uneditable, but it stays there and is still active for tools snap...

[stefan]

And while you're at it, take a peek at how it is implemented in other tools as well:

SketchUp -> rest get's dim & transparant, but still visible as a reference. You have control over this visibility in the preferences.

VectorWorks -> editing a group of elements or a symbol (aka "block" in AutoCAD terms) always happens in the same way. Here the rest of the drawing gets hidden, though.

Strata3D -> an "instance" of a shape can be opened in a new window and edited at will. The rest of the scene updates if you close that window again.

---> All these systems are very fast and don't require to open a new element, modify and save changes to be able to continue.

The AutoCAD way of in-place block & reference editing is not that fast and clear to see what you are doing, but it was a major improvement over the past (where you had to either create a new block & redefine or open the other drawing, save changes and, in case of a block, insert the file into the drawing again).

---

I hardly use modules, but I don't do large projects, so it is possible that I underestimate their importance.

[Geoffroy Magnan]

SketchUp -> rest get's dim & transparant, but still visible as a reference. You have control over this visibility in the preferences.

In fact the way sketchup works seems the best way to achieve this "in place editing" function.

[Djordje]

SketchUp -> rest get's dim & transparant, but still visible as a reference. You have control over this visibility in the preferences.

In fact the way sketchup works seems the best way to achieve this "in place editing" function.

Who takes care of what module is edited in place and who has the right to do it? I clearly see a situation where two people are editing the same module in place. Which one gets saved? Each to a new file? belies the purpose of a module.

Call me old fashioned, I vote for opening the original file and editing it. That way there is no possibility that two versions exist concurrently.

[Geoffroy Magnan]

Who takes care of what module is edited in place and who has the right to do it? I clearly see a situation where two people are editing the same module in place. Which one gets saved? Each to a new file? belies the purpose of a module.

Call me old fashioned, I vote for opening the original file and editing it. That way there is no possibility that two versions exist concurrently.

If ArchiCAD managed correctly the file ownership, this wouldn't be a problem. When I open a word file on the network, I get a message telling me that user X has opened the file and asking : notify when editing is done, open read-only, or cancel... Is it so difficult to implement.

The point here is that when you edit the module outside of the plan, you have don't have reference to your primary drawing and you can't snap to these elements.

[Geoff Briggs]

When I switched from VectorWorks I immediately missed the symbols. Not because of the way you edit them, but because of their usefulness–change one instance and all the others change. Modules promise this but miss the mark. They seem better suited to large, well, modules, as opposed to simple little groups or objects.

AC needs a new object type like symbols or blocks, that can be imported but then become part of the file so changes don't affect any other projects. And it sure would be nice if they could be placed in S/E.

BTW, I think editing in place is the way to go for Modules or blocks. You get my vote.

[Tom Krowka]

Couldn't you just have two sessions of ArchiCad open? I used to do that with Autocad before they had the in place editing.

Tom

[James Murray]

<bump>

In-place editing would be a huge timesaver in cases of symmetry and repetition.

I have two current projects are very intricate and very symmetrical. That means lots of fine modeling, followed by lots of mirroring/copying. I would love to build one dormer in all its detailed glory, save it as a module, place it around, and then edit one of them to modify them all.

It's not realistic, to me, to have such a thing as a module as it stands; I need the context of the rest of the project when working on it.

[Keith JAW]

I would like to add my vote for in-place editing, having just finished 2 weeks' work on a project containing 26 modules - and what a chore it is to have to keep closing the .PLN before editing a module!

Previously I have used 'nested' modules, which is useful way to get over that 'almost-but-not-quite-standard' room (e.g. in hotels), where the inner module contains all the common elements, and the outer module contains those elements which repeat in the majority of cases. (You can also do it retrospectively, if you come across a rogue situation after you've defined the main module).

This proves to be laborious, however without in-place editing, as you have to open, edit and save the inner module, and then open and save the outer module, so that it updates, before you can open and update the main plan.

[oreopoulos]

I agree. In place editing is a MUST.
I may want to change elements of the structure that reference geometry of other modules (parallel distance from... and so on).

Please do it in next version.

There is no real problem with ownership. Just inform a user anotherone is using and post a message when its finished.