Came across this channel on Youtube. Not sure what eObjects is based on but it is miles ahead of DGS as far as usability is concerned.
1. Good multipanel window that incorporates a model tree. Each model can be 'located on/off'.
2. Offline mode: strongly suggests that eObjects is based on a separate database ?
3. Good 'listening functions': when Mstn changes models, eObjects syncs its display. Or when an element that the eObject is reporting on is modified in Mstn.
4. Drag and drop attribute assignment. From both the attribute panel and the graphics window.
5. Note how multiple attribute tags can be assigned to the graphic objects without having to go 'back stage' and fiddle with xml files first.
Couldn't really understand it, ..... But anything has got to be better than the DGS (good grief, ...... even the basic terminology is ....... just plain wrong, ..... as are a lot of other things in it). xml??????????????? Bentley Systems, ..... we do Buildings, not IT jiggery pokery. There seem to be some minor (very minor) improvements in SS6. But is still very clunky and I'm sorry to say, not 'fit for intended purposes' Enough for now
Regards
Danny Cooley
Freelance AEC CAD/BIM Technician Architecture, MEP & Structural ..... (& ex Low Carbon Consultant, ..... because they weren't that bothered!)
OBD Update 10, Windows 10 Pro, HP Z4-G4, 64Gb, Xeon 3.6GHz, Quadro M4000
Dominic, they do have some nice concepts, especially their tagging. I'm a bit confused by point 3. The DG Explorer should be updating any time you make a change in your DGN and vice versa. Are you not seeing that?
Danny, what kind of improvements/changes would you like to see in the DGS to make it more fit for intended purposes? (or if you prefer, we could set up a time for you to show me things that really bug you)
Tom 'or if you prefer, we could set up a time for you to show me things that really bug you' That would be good, ...... not in the next few days though. I will try and discuss things with the Bentley UK User Group before going any futher Briefly, ..... There is a lot of superflous data/information, ...... centre of gravity of insulation?????????? Really! References to ASHRAE in the GB version, dims and sizes that are clearly feet and inches just changed to mm Datagroup, ???????????????? Has anyone ever seen a building made of 'datagroup instances'????? Can't we just call this what it is? A 'catalog of building components' Objects just arranged 'mindlessly' in alphabetical order ........ Roofs next to Shelving, Curtain Wall then Escalators, Stairs the Toilet Accesory! It seems the 'Properties' for Plumbing have just been copied across to all the Plumbing Components, ...... this is just plain daft Toilets, Sinks, Floor Drains, Rainwater outlets with insulation, ........ this is ...... silly! These things should be arranged as they are in the NBS, ...... there is a sequence or 'order' for a reason. It relates to how things are designed and built! As a general point, there is just way to much information there a lot of the time. There needs to be a 'reduced data' or streamlined Dataset, which is used at the outset of the project. As it stands, the Level Of Detail currently contained in the Dataset will generally not be required until about 3, 4, maybe 5 years after the design work starts. It's 'stodgy' and complete overkill! In fairness, with SS6, there have been some improvements. Not investigated properly yet, but it would appear to be a lot easier/clearer to amend/create new items For general/mainstream use, things need re-naming so that it's clear it belongs to the 'Standard-Company Catalog' and what belongs to the 'Project Specific Catalog', ....... nobody wants to know or should have to know about drive+folder locations The whole Centreline approach needs reviewing. You don't just 'mindlessly' show the centreline of everything. It's a lot more selective than that OK, enough for now