Marking PartDesign not properly attached datums

Have some feature requests, feedback, cool stuff to share, or want to know where FreeCAD is going? This is the place.
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Read the FreeCAD code of conduct!
abdullah
Posts: 3174
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 3:16 pm

Marking PartDesign not properly attached datums

Postby abdullah » Sun Jun 16, 2019 12:48 am

I am doing a medium size project, and one problem I have come across is that when reworking a part done with PartDesign, in which datum planes and lines where used attached to a master sketch, the datum planes and lines eventually lost the link (probably licit because of the rework), but nevertheless stayed in place. The rework should cause these datums to move about 1 mm and it was not very much evident that they were no longer linked, until I made the master sketch visible and set the right view.

I do not know if this is something relevant, so my question.

I have just hacked away a half working implementation that looks like this:
Screenshot_20190616_023820.png
Screenshot_20190616_023820.png (20.97 KiB) Viewed 459 times
So basically, datums could get an overlay status icon somewhere (now is bottom left). The ones that are attached would get the greenish thingy (I thought it was a weight when I made the text pixmap, but it is not clear at all) and ones that are not attached the yellow thingy (was supposed to be a yellow balloon, not my best art, not that I can do art anyway). Practical implementation says that it should be something that can be distinguished by shape, because datums are generally not visible and a greyed out icon makes them look the same.

Well, this is just to ask the question, does this make any sense? Any follow up ideas?
chrisb
Posts: 16868
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:14 am

Re: Marking PartDesign not properly attached datums

Postby chrisb » Sun Jun 16, 2019 5:16 am

It makes perfectly sense to distinguish attached and not attached items, as we have seen here some troubles. The concept should be extended to sketches and primitives. To not overload the tree it would be sufficient to mark only the non attached items.
Jee-Bee
Posts: 1915
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 10:32 am
Location: Netherlands

Re: Marking PartDesign not properly attached datums

Postby Jee-Bee » Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:10 am

chrisb wrote:
Sun Jun 16, 2019 5:16 am
To not overload the tree it would be sufficient to mark only the non attached items.
+1
User avatar
GlouGlou
Posts: 1448
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2015 9:02 am
Location: La Rochelle, France

Re: Marking PartDesign not properly attached datums

Postby GlouGlou » Sun Jun 16, 2019 7:35 am

could be with the caption of items: Sketch for attached, Sketch for free. or something like that.
wmayer
Site Admin
Posts: 14442
Joined: Thu Feb 19, 2009 10:32 am

Re: Marking PartDesign not properly attached datums

Postby wmayer » Sun Jun 16, 2019 8:26 am

And IMO the overlay icon shouldn't be in green, orange or red but in a neutral color because at least for non-attached datum objects it doesn't mean there is something broken in the design.
abdullah
Posts: 3174
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 3:16 pm

Re: Marking PartDesign not properly attached datums

Postby abdullah » Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:13 pm

An attempt:
https://github.com/FreeCAD/FreeCAD/pull/2272

If the code is acceptable, the icon may be changed:
Screenshot_20190618_194726.png
Screenshot_20190618_194726.png (15.18 KiB) Viewed 296 times
It is not really difficult to make something better...
User avatar
Hannu
Posts: 93
Joined: Fri Sep 11, 2015 4:12 pm
Location: Strängnäs - 1hr drive west from Stockholm, Sweden

Re: Marking PartDesign not properly attached datums

Postby Hannu » Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:03 pm

FWIW: I use glasses, a different pair depending on what I'm at - the latest pair received just a month ago or so.

These tiny 'status indicators' isn't very helpful IMO.
I can see there is one but have a hard time to distinguish between them.

Suggestion:
Might it be possible to "append" (a?) larger icon(s) after (to the right of) the main feature icon, before the text?
Maybe make it/them be 2/3 the height of the main one?
/Hannu
abdullah
Posts: 3174
Joined: Sun May 04, 2014 3:16 pm

Re: Marking PartDesign not properly attached datums

Postby abdullah » Thu Jun 20, 2019 4:37 pm

Hannu wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 5:03 pm
FWIW: I use glasses, a different pair depending on what I'm at - the latest pair received just a month ago or so.

These tiny 'status indicators' isn't very helpful IMO.
I can see there is one but have a hard time to distinguish between them.

Suggestion:
Might it be possible to "append" (a?) larger icon(s) after (to the right of) the main feature icon, before the text?
Maybe make it/them be 2/3 the height of the main one?
Glasses or no glasses, with the current icon size it is difficult to actually identify the shape of the overlay. I cannot. I only pay attention to the colour and the position relative to the main icon:

Top right (related to recomputes and errors). If blueish I need a recompute. If red oh oh, look a the report window.
Bottom right (only in PD, only for the tip, it is greenish).
Bottom left (only in PD, only for identification of lack of attachment, it is pink).

I would rather not include several icons. Having a larger icon would require increasing the icon sizes and the treeview lines would be restricted. This is kind of a general decision.
openBrain
Posts: 1584
Joined: Fri Nov 09, 2018 5:38 pm

Re: Marking PartDesign not properly attached datums

Postby openBrain » Wed Jul 17, 2019 5:02 pm

abdullah wrote:
Wed Jun 19, 2019 4:13 pm
If the code is acceptable, the icon may be changed:
I realized today that this feature is available. And indeed the icon is ... awful. :lol:
Looks like front view of a car, so can't give an obvious meaning to that. :)
What about something like that :
not_attached_icon.svg.png
not_attached_icon.svg.png (2.66 KiB) Viewed 154 times
Attachments
not_attached_icon.svg
(3.4 KiB) Downloaded 2 times
chrisb
Posts: 16868
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:14 am

Re: Marking PartDesign not properly attached datums

Postby chrisb » Wed Jul 17, 2019 7:35 pm

How about an open lock?