This is just part of the history tree on a single imported part modified. A simple 2 point link that I needed to make offset. Over time this can end up being a scrolled list of hundreds of items on a much more complex part. The only visual organization is the icons. If you have 10 sketches associated to a body those sketches will be spread out throughout the history. The majority of people aren’t going to remember what chamfer or fillet number is which on the model nor will they remember exactly what sketch number is which.
Going through all of this on a complex part with dozens if not hundreds of changes and pieces of the history to find a particular sketch would undoubtedly disrupt the workflow way more than having a “redundant” organization system in the items menu to simply have the bodies and sketches that are tied grouped in a way that visually makes it easy to identify.
When I was going through and documenting workflow issues, this was one thing that I did myself when I was playing with the parametric route. I was putting sketches into folders with their respective bodies
I wouldn’t mind something like this that wasn’t as intrusive. I’m not UI designer but I think it would work.
I get there’s the other way of doing things but I’d prefer to have one list than to have to click on two, especially if I’m opening the objects panel, clicking and object, opening the history panel and then clicking on a sketch.
I think if they went this route then the filtering system would need improving too.
Whenever a body is created it nests a reference of it’s related sketch under it automatically and you can expand/collapse that relationship list with the click of button.
Allows all the sketches in the Items panel be near their bodies and allows us to collapse them like folders for a more organized view.
I’m not much of a UI designer either but this seems intuitive to me!
Well done @Justin074 this is exactly what I was imagining as well. Those of us that have been using shapr pre HBPM got very used to only the items menu. I rarely if ever open the history menu currently and think this would be beneficial to a lot of people.
Edit: I’ll also add this type of tree feature would also be good to have for working on larger assemblies. Currently have to navigate from one folder to another to another. Makes copying and moving parts (hardware and the like) into the proper folder very time consuming.
Based on the feedback we’ve been getting in the last few days, we see that our non-professional users often struggle with the basics of parametric modeling, and sometimes think that some of the new features are bugs I’ve recorded this quick overview of parametric modeling, that will be interesting for those users who are interested in learning how they could elevate their workflow to the next level using parametric modeling, but haven’t really managed to grasp it until now.
Ps.: as I say it in the video, this is not a tutorial, don’t try to follow it in the app. Just focus on understanding the workflow. We have a many new tutorials, I’ve linked them several times in other threads, if you missed it, please let me know and I’ll share the links again.
Ps2.: yes, not every bug is a feature, we are fixing those
I understand the benefits to parametric modeling and in some instances it is nice to have.
What we’ve been discussing more recently in this post is automatic ways to clean up the clutter of the Items panel with bodies and sketches strewn about. A lot of us don’t like tossing all sketches into a trash can folder. We’d rather have them automatically nested and hidden under the body like my mock up shows.
Also, I think I would use history more if I was able to disconnect the History and Items panel from the workspace.
I get a little claustraphobic feeling in a sense when both panels are open, so as it is, I normally leave my Items panel open and just hide the history panel. I don’t like constantly opening and closing panels so I end up not taking advantage of the history as much as I could and just do things the old way or delete something and start it again.
I made a feature request to be able to float the panels so that we can place them on second monitors, if we are using them. Hopefully that’s been given some thought!
Agreed, especially for older users that may be upset with the new update. This in conjunction with the collapse history feature upcoming (i’m sure many would hope that it’s a toggle but that seems out of the question) would help to keep older users within the program.
I’ve seen many express doubts and contemplate leaving it due simply to the massive change that seems to be known by the shapr staff after the feedback, but not necessarily understood. I’m one of those very people. I’m coming around, but hoping to help make the program easier to function for the people that got used to it prior.
This was one of my main concerns that I expressed and was dismissed on with the update. That this was targeted towards a specific user group. I hope that the rest of the users are being heard and listened to as well as the people that requested HBPM to begin with.
I’ve recorded this quick overview of parametric modeling, that will be interesting for those users who are interested in learning how they could elevate their workflow to the next level using parametric modeling, but haven’t really managed to grasp it until now.