< .. > What is your opinion of ADN?
If the ADN was an independent service I doubt it would survive.
Having access to various versions and builds is a big help sometimes.
The ADN is not some magical storehouse of chants and spells. The knowledge base is really just a refined collection of some of the questions asked and answered .. handy sometimes, but I don't think the interesting questions and answers ever see the light of day.
The answers to any questions I've asked are sometimes helpfull .. though the wait is sometimes painfull.
This actually expands on the point I was trying to make initially. If we had complete API documentation the ADN could be used for solving the more difficult problems that arise, rather than servicing simple "How do I .. " questions.
Actually, I'm prepared to hazard a guess that the ADN tech guys have as much trouble as we do finding out specifics about the API.
We only have to analyse the questions that are repeatedly asked here at TheSwamp , at the DicussionGroup, at Augi, at CadTutor etc to realise how much waste is being caused by not having complete documentation .... this is compounded by the fact that sometimes the answers are guesses and wrong and sometimes it takes an inordinate amount of peer patience to actually determine what the actual question really is. Any dotNet AutoCAD internet search will currently return more out of date information or incorrect/halfcorrect guesses or pleas for help that it returns usefull relevant data.
There are several blogs that help to fill some of the gaps with insightful posts ... but my argument is that they only partially fill gaps in information that should be available in one, or a series of coordinated documents.
I probably should just revise my expectations, but I'm sure they are also the expectations of a lot of other people who aren't so forthcoming.
Regards and apologies if your ears hurt
kdub