Hi,
I have heard rumors in hushed voices that "Bentley is now recommending that we consolidate all of our DGNLIBs into one."
Surely NOT EVERYBODY was Kung Fu Fighting! Right?
I know the value of Federation, particularly by discipline (Bridge, Utilities, Civil, Survey). I know the disadvantage of consolidating into a single omnibus.dgnlib (twenty surgeons working on the same spleen doesn't work very well).
My questions to Bentley and the Community:
Asking for a friend's spleen...
Thanks. If Robert and Mark agree, then it's case closed: bad rumor. Unless I hear something from Bentley, then we stay with what we're doing. Thanks!
LMAO... your humor is certainly welcome out here, Jeff!
We are going to stick with what we have as well. We have so much data that even a slight rebuild would take serious time!
Mark
Thanks, Mark. All else being the same, I'd rather laugh while working. Fun is an overlooked quality metric. It's not particularly welcome in some places, though (government agencies have concerns about public records). I think (hope) we're safe here.
Mark Plum the reason I like utilities sperate is because utility features tend to be extremely similar in every jurisdiction. With a separate utility library, I can easily migrate the library from state to state and town to town with very little effort other than changing levels in the element templates.
Robert Garrett Senior Consultant
www.envisioncad.com