Right now, creating a Link to Part makes the link labeled "Part001". Which is totally useless and confusing.
I propose prepending a dash to the name, so link to Part is labeled "-Part". This way I immediately see, what exactly the link is to.
Link to Part is labeled Part001. Not useful. How about fixing that?
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Read the FreeCAD code of conduct!
Be nice to others! Read the FreeCAD code of conduct!
- DeepSOIC
- Veteran
- Posts: 7896
- Joined: Fri Aug 29, 2014 12:45 am
- Location: used to be Saint-Petersburg, Russia
Re: Link to Part is labeled Part001. Not useful. How about fixing that?
Wait... if I create another Link to Part, it will then get a label "-Part001". That's even more confusing. Better suggestions?
Re: Link to Part is labeled Part001. Not useful. How about fixing that?
Hmm for me the first link has the name Part001 and the second link Part002. The labels don't show any hyphens. But I agree that it should be more obvious which object a link is referring to. What about Link (Part), Link001 (Part), ...?
Re: Link to Part is labeled Part001. Not useful. How about fixing that?
Hello!
But on multi document it the naming works fine.
Greetings
user
Also discussed on: https://forum.freecadweb.org/viewtopic. ... 7&start=30.
But on multi document it the naming works fine.
Greetings
user
Re: Link to Part is labeled Part001. Not useful. How about fixing that?
I don't know if it is possible but i would say add a new column(hidden by default) that create a feature or object count.
When probably part_b is an assembly than
Etc.
This is more difficult for the short moment but in the long term better.
I can even imagine that it counts all the features in that way... but i can imagine that, that means a huge amount of rework...
Code: Select all
part_a - Label_part_a - object_#(0)
part_b - Label_part_b - object_#(1)
part_c - Label_part_c - object_#(2)
link_to_part_a - Label_part_a - object_#(3)
link_to_part_a - Label_part_a - object_#(4)
link_to_part_b - Label_part_b - object_#(5)
Code: Select all
part_a - Label_part_a - object_#(0)
ass_b - Label_part_b - object_#(1)
|-ass_part_a - Label_ass_part_a - object_#(2)
|-ass_part_b - Label_ass_part_b - object_#(3)
|-ass_part_c - Label_ass_part_c - object_#(4)
|-ass_part_b - Label_ass_part_b - object_#(5)
|-ass_part_c - Label_ass_part_c - object_#(6)
|-ass_part_a - Label_ass_part_a - object_#(7)
part_c - Label_part_c - object_#(8)
link_to_part_a - Label_part_a - object_#(9)
link_to_part_a - Label_part_a - object_#(10)
link_to_ass_b - Label_ass_b - object_#(11)
|-ass_part_a - Label_ass_part_a - object_#(12)
|-ass_part_b - Label_ass_part_b - object_#(13)
|-ass_part_c - Label_ass_part_c - object_#(14)
|-ass_part_b - Label_ass_part_b - object_#(15)
|-ass_part_c - Label_ass_part_c - object_#(16)
|-ass_part_a - Label_ass_part_a - object_#(17)
This is more difficult for the short moment but in the long term better.
I can even imagine that it counts all the features in that way... but i can imagine that, that means a huge amount of rework...