What is actually a "Graphic Group"?

Joan Martínez Serra said:

I see 2 ways to create a Group in MicroStation:

- Group

- Named Group.

the worst is that it is one dialog - in my view - "Add to Graphic Group" there you have to switch on the Option "Named Group" . Without you get GG, with the option an NG.

That is confusing.

Named Groups allow dependencies and "active" and "passive" members.

The worst is though that you can not copy that "Named Group" (or create a cell from it) ( it is a longstanding request) - In effect the Named Groups are not useable in practice.

You can copy GGs (it increases the GG Number)

Also - to confuse new users ? - there is the "Group" command which effectively creates an (unnamed) cell. (You can give it a name later in the properties)

Joan Martínez Serra said:

I see 2 ways to create a Group in MicroStation:

- Group

- Named Group.

the worst is that it is one dialog - in my view - "Add to Graphic Group" there you have to switch on the Option "Named Group" . Without you get GG, with the option an NG.

That is confusing.

Named Groups allow dependencies and "active" and "passive" members.

The worst is though that you can not copy that "Named Group" (or create a cell from it) ( it is a longstanding request) - In effect the Named Groups are not useable in practice.

You can copy GGs (it increases the GG Number)

Also - to confuse new users ? - there is the "Group" command which effectively creates an (unnamed) cell. (You can give it a name later in the properties)

I have seen that a Note ("Place Note") based on a Dimension + Text, it has the "Graphic Group property in its Properties palette.

So a Note (leader + text) is precisely a Graphic Group.

On the other hand, a Dimension has several subentities but it is not a Graphic Group.

Joan Martínez Serra said:

So a Note (leader + text) is precisely a Graphic Group.

It's not quite right statement (or it's lost in translation ;-)

• Historically, there is no "Note element" available in DGN V8 format specification, so Place Note tool have to create 2 independent elements: Dimension (leader) and cell with all other elements. To bring them together, GG is used. I do not like the formulation "they are GG", in my opinion is "they belong to the same GG", because no "GG element" or "GG definition" exists in DGN file.
• Dimension is DGN element. Regardless how complicated the dimension is, it's still one element.

Regards,

  Jan

The GG is sometimes "historically" used to group elements together. They can be either moved together - when the "GraphicGroup Lock" is on. Otherwise they are moved independent. It is a bit archaic and I guess not used widely because it is not straightforward to be used.

mlm said:

You can not copy a Named Group

Please describe the workflow when a copy of a Named Group would be useful.

• Does copy also copy children of that NG?
• Does copy also copy the DGN elements assigned to that NG?

mlm said:

You can not create a cell from a Named Group

I can see how that might work.

• NG name => Cell Name
• DGN elements in NG become cell components
• What about children of the NG?

mlm said:

it is a longstanding request

Request to Bentley Systems?  We know that they tend to get lost under the carpet (your words!).  Post another Idea to make it formal.

mlm said:

In effect the Named Groups are not useable in practice.

I strongly disagree with such general statement, especially because I know users that use NG daily.

It does not mean that NG is not usable for you.

mlm said:

The worst is though that you can not copy that "Named Group"

Similarly to Jon I do not quite understand what do you mean by "copy NG":

• Definition of NG is copied, so I have two exactly the same definitions?
• A content of NG is copied, so elements are duplicated?

mlm said:

(or create a cell from it) ( it is a longstanding request)

I do not recall I saw such request in ideas, but they are many of them, so maybe I missed it.

The request sounds interesting, but is not simple, because NG allows "far referencing", when elements in NG can be from active model, and from direct/nested references. So more conditions have to be fulfilled to allow to create a cell from NG content.

mlm said:

Also - to confuse new users ? - there is the "Group" command which effectively creates an (unnamed) cell.

Well, it's a result of history and only limited "good words" in language. Do you have any idea how one or second tool should be renamed?

Regards,

  Jan