adrianinsaval wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 2:58 am
Can you elaborate why? I don't see why one workbench would be different to the others.
A true part file contains one part which can be assigned a material. An assembly file contains part files which may contain pieces of aluminum and some bolts which it becomes harder to assign an assembly file one type of material. A2+ uses parts and then uses constraints in the assembly file to make the assembly. In Assembly 3 and 4, to my understanding, you constrain parts together to create a part or an assembly in the same file. It gives more flexibility but blurs the difference between a part and assembly.
Cyclonit wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 11:57 am
file-names are up to the user and creating an artificial restriction in FreeCAD just to have two different file extensions is not worth it.
Why stop at two different file extensions? What if you looked in a file directory and saw the extensions FCdoc, FCss, FCassm2, FCpart2, FCassm3, FCassm4, FCpdf, FCArch, FCTdraw. Would that help humans find what file they want? If someone wanted to write a PDM the programmer would have a standard FreeCAD naming convention to work with rather than examining each file to determine what kind of file it is.
Cyclonit wrote: ↑Tue Jul 27, 2021 11:57 am
Adding an interface to allow external tools to add or modify metadata in FreeCAD files is a good idea, but I see no reason to limit this capability to assembly files.
I do not believe my statement limits the transfer of metadata to assemblies.
Dan