[Ticket #4727] Point visualisation/appearance

[Pauvres_honteux]

I'd like to propose a function/command/tool to alter a point/vertex visualisation/appearance no matter how that point/vertex was created.

It would allow to make the point/vertex to look as the user whish, for example a star, a square, a triangle, a plus and so on.
Further it must of course be possible to change its colours, but that should probably be handled by a separate tool so one can change the colour of anything with one single tool.

What shapes to allow then, you say? I say any shape or form, go nuts and create a user expandable list to choose from!

Make it easy, for the user, to create shapes to be used as point/vertex and equally easy to add those shapes to the list of choosable shapes.


2021-06-30: I guess this one is related issue #4692.

[openBrain]

Useless to me.

[chrisb]

Why not create a 3D model for the points ? Joke aside, I don't need it either.

[drmacro]

Hmm...for normal usage, I see round or square as pretty common throughout the industry.

That's not to say it doesn't exist. Certainly in things like Inkscape it may be a fanciful artistic expression sort of thing.

For CAD, it seems it would appear frivolous to have more than round and square as options.

Maybe there needs to be an Artistic Expression workbench...

Might make some sense in Tech Draw for notations though.

[Pauvres_honteux]

... I see round or square as pretty common throughout the industry.

... and adding: The CAD-program I use at work has quite a few more shapes to choose from.

But I feel it should be more "open sourcy" to be able to add and/or change these symbols by the user.

Heck, imagine one make a sketch full of center points for screw holes (point pattern) and change their appearance to resemble a screw. That would really set them apart from other sets of center point patterns! Such as post centers for buildings or HVAC in a ship or electric outlets in a building and so on.

Why not create a 3D model for the points?

Who knows, you may be on to something there?

Useless to me.

... I'll grant you one guess on how usefull that comment was ...

[drmacro]

... I see round or square as pretty common throughout the industry.

... and adding: The CAD-program I use at work has quite a few more shapes to choose from.

But I feel it should be more "open sourcy" to be able to add and/or change these symbols by the user.

Heck, imagine one make a sketch full of center points for screw holes (point pattern) and change their appearance to resemble a screw. That would really set them apart from other sets of center point patterns! Such as post centers for buildings or HVAC in a ship or electric outlets in a building and so on.

Why not create a 3D model for the points?

Who knows, you may be on to something there?

Useless to me.

... I'll grant you one guess on how usefull that comment was ...

I think you are an "artist" masquerading as a "engineer"...

[openBrain]

... I'll grant you one guess on how usefull that comment was ...

Are you saying it has no usefulness to know what is the interest ratio of a feature inside the community?

[user1234]

I think the suggestion is pretty OK. In my former work we often got only point only point outputs for function shapes. Wit these points we made a machinable geometry. But the points and the align points still stored as variables for the output (they was parsed to a ERP system) in the model for the measuring/quality/management./control. For better visibility it is more than OK.

Also as Pauvres_honteux wrote: if you have irregular pattern on larger objects, it helps also for the visibility. I also worked on objects, they are on the base function regular. But with sensor bores, measure points, additional functions bores, screw points, accessibility, ..... , it become fast irregular. And for that we had (with a other CAD program) standardized 3D point appearance for each kind of function.

But the appearance should change only when the output of the shape are points only.

Are you saying it has no usefulness to know what is the interest ratio of a feature inside the community?

Sorry, but that is just ignorance. You must also think in others people restricted (restricted because of the kind of engineering is given) workflow.


Greetings
user1234

edit: typo

[openBrain]

Sorry, but that is just ignorance. You must also think in others people restricted (restricted because of the kind of engineering is given) workflow

Ignorance of what? No, I don't must think to others when giving my own opinion. I gave (just) my own opinion which of course is related to my own need/workflow. Nothing more.

[user1234]

I gave (just) my own opinion which of course is related to my own need/workflow. Nothing more.

Ok, but it sounded like that you are strictly against it. A misinterpretation from me.

Greetings
user1234