0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
1st where are you in the world ?2nd cad standards are just all over the place even between government authorities wanting different things I can think of at least 3.3rd common sense should prevail no random naming every one on same page. Layers colours linetypes etc. mspace xrefs layouts.4th Google Cad standards I know on Cadutor there was some stuff.Lastly had a state authority tell us some stuff on a traffic plan was wrong and looked at plans done for them and it was the same as ours so we will not change and will argue check your own in house rules first. Problem is they are so old school using basicly 2 colours cyan and Black.
Lastly had a state authority tell us some stuff on a traffic plan was wrong and looked at plans done for them and it was the same as ours so we will not change and will argue check your own in house rules first. Problem is they are so old school using basicly 2 colours cyan and Black.
And.....after all this time IT still is NOT the 'national' cad 'standard'
It never will be as long as it is ONLY an architectural standard, the rest of us don't need 75 layers pertaining to doors and windows
Quote from: Randall Culp on December 04, 2017, 02:11:30 PMIt never will be as long as it is ONLY an architectural standard, the rest of us don't need 75 layers pertaining to doors and windows... and they stop charging so dam much for it.
Quote from: Rob... on December 04, 2017, 04:26:54 PMQuote from: Randall Culp on December 04, 2017, 02:11:30 PMIt never will be as long as it is ONLY an architectural standard, the rest of us don't need 75 layers pertaining to doors and windows... and they stop charging so dam much for it.True...I argue that to gain acceptance and to increase its footprint it should have been released for FREE. their fees are the hurdle many don't want to cross....so there it is.
Meh. If they switched from free to paid-access, then the complaints would switch to "extortion", "lock in", or other popular term-of-the-day for "I want it therefore it should be free". At that point it may as well be paid-only in the first place.
You mean the same way people pay for software which is not the standard? It's done, because it meets their needs and (if they've done their homework) it's more financially viable than developing their own from scratch. Being perceived as any kind of "official standard" doesn't enter into it.
"without really consulting the industries they are attempting to foist it off on."