[Ticket #4614] Request for a separate Assy file format

[Pauvres_honteux]

Request:issue #4614

[Pauvres_honteux]

Thinking about Part(the one undevidable thing you can lay your hands on, not FC "Part container") versus PDM programs in general, I realized a potential integrity threat.

It goes like this,
- The whole eco system for any big vehicle producing company today revolves around a PDM system.

- That PDM system is so tight bound to everything it is almost impossible to replace, hence it stays there for very long time(40+ years).

- This means there are many different PDM systems out there which will stay put for the foreseable future.

- To make them PDM systems compatible with FC one must utilize the principle of dual file system, or expressed another way, a separate Assy file format.

- This will prevent these PDM systems from having their way inside your hard-worked-for Part.

- The PDM systems can move files around in space without having the possibility to destroy any Parts.

Id est, FC shall block external program access to Parts and allow access to Assy-files.

[Aleks]

- This will prevent these PDM systems from having their way inside your hard-worked-for Part.

Can you elaborate on that?
How does having a separate Assembly file-extension affect the assembly? The only reason I can think of is that its clearer to the end user what file this represents, but someone already pointed out that you could use the fileextension *.assembly.FCStd. Genuine question.

P.S. I have not worked with super large (multiple thousand) part assemblies up until now.

[Pauvres_honteux]

Can you elaborate on that?

Sure, what part is it that you do not understand?

PDM-systems?
The eco-system?
How manufacturers have set up their organizations?
Read/write rights on files?
Letting other software opening up FreeCAD?
The principle of manufacturing once then assemble in multiple ways?
Anything else?

Also, you say you've been working with CATIA. Did you use a PDM-system then? If so, which one?

[Aleks]

Sure, what part is it that you do not understand?

Also, you say you've been working with CATIA. Did you use a PDM-system then? If so, which one?

How does having a separate Assembly file-extension affect the assembly?

I worked with CATIA but not in combination with a PDM system.

[Pauvres_honteux]

How does having a separate Assembly file-extension affect the assembly?

I worked with CATIA but not in combination with a PDM system.

Okey, I may be getting a clue where the trip wire lies.

As I typed earlier, the separate Assy-file identified by the file extension will hold links to other files including them files position+rotation relative to the Assy-file internal zero(point + axis coordinate system) or/and other files loaded by the Assy-file.

The internals of that Assy-file can/will be manipulated by FreeCAD and a PDM-system of users choice.
The internals of a Part-file will only be possible to manipulate by FreeCAD.

The file extension itself can be named to *.knife or *.salt or *.curtain if one so whish. The extension denomination doesn't effect anything.

Regarding PDM-systems, I suggest you read up on them, but not by looking at sales promotion videos of them. Those videos assumes the viewer to know A LOT of background+history information.

Did that straighten some question marks?

[Aleks]

I am going to look that up, maybe I will understand that better. The assemblies I have done up until now were just done using assembly files that dynamically linked to part files. Inside FreeCAD I have only used A2plus and its not possible to modifiy parts there directly. Can you suggest any video or article on that?

[adrianinsaval]

Can you explain what's the risk and how would having a different extension is going to help with that? If the software is not malicious I don't see why it would mess with files it's not supposed to mess with. If it is malicious then the file extension is not going to change that.

[Aleks]

Can you explain what's the risk and how would having a different extension is going to help with that? If the software is not malicious I don't see why it would mess with files it's not supposed to mess with. If it is malicious then the file extension is not going to change that.

I think this isnt about being malicious, but its about project management.

[Cyclonit]

I understand that you might want to prevent other tools from tinkering with your assemblies. But this shouldn't have any impact on whether FreeCAD allows assemblies and parts within the same files. If your tool environment demands different file extensions for parts and assemblies, you could simply coin your own. Just name all of your parts "something.part.fcad" and your assemblies "something.assy.fcad".

Currently there is no internal restriction to having both parts and assemblies in a single .fcad file and I don't see any reason to artificially create such a restriction. If you desire to keep the two separate, that's fine. But what if you want to keep both of them in one file? You might have some procedural sub-assembly where having a single file comes in handy. I.e. for packaging and reuse.