While I can see this as one way forward, I am slightly of a different"just constrain until it goes green" strategy
design philosphy, where the user tries to constrain as the item would be
build/drawn it to a standard.**
I know some will say this may be slower in the solver but, if you follow the
much vaunted KISS principle to the sketch, modern (even a few years old) cpus can probably
cope.
Thus a repeated plea for an option where the system inserts dimensions/constraints as
the user draw, i,e, the sketch is always 'green'! [Advantages, sketches rarely fold, no concerns
about what to with redundant constraints, the user is prompted to see what the system requires to close the calcs]
If the system selected constraints/dimensions are not what the user wants the contextual functionality,
being offered by the OP, makes it easy to overide system selection! [If a user added
dimension/constraint results in alternatives to keep the sketch 'solved', the system selects
one or more new ones to keep everything solved. It/they may be what the user wants, in which case great, if not use this functionality described in this thread eases the task
toupdate to what the users wants.]
Hopefully simpler for the newbie, and really no extra hassle for the experienced user.
[It could always be offered as a selectable option]
** I am sure to generate some flames, but constraining [typ. offset from a datum,
symmetric or equal dims] and adding dimensions to the sketch which are similar to the final
technical drawing can be very thought provoking! The drawing standards are there to ensure
the shape of the geometry is captured and traditionally how the item is to be made/inspected, e.g.
simple things like diameters rather than radius of rod, distances from datums - fixed edges or
centerlines/lines of symmetry. SO for the penalty of a few more clock cycles if the user
approaches the sketch this way, there is a chance that the generation of the technical drawings,
GD&T, manufacturing methodology & inspection may be easier.
I understand this is FreeCAD and it may not be the way it works, and I should read the manuals.
However, can I gently suggest that anyone who has not used one of the commercial packages with
this sort of functionality they try one of the demo packages, or watch a Youtube presentation,
when/if they have a chance. You may be surprised at how the option can free the designer
to generate what they want rather than what they think the system will accept to make a robust set of constraints.
It may not be the way for everyone, but it could be useful and user
friendly to others.
I don't know enough about the working of Sketcher and the generation/transfer of
dimensions/constraints to/from Techdraw etc, but if auto-dimensioning ( I assume
the info must already be being captured in the background) + user overide is thought to
be a relatively low hanging fruit I would really like someone much cleverer than I has a look at
offering some of the users the option. [If it would mean a complete re-writeof , or even substantial
change to, Sketcher +++, then obviously the concept is trashed/drops to the
bottom of any request pile! However it would be interesting to understand something
about the technical difficulties involved]
Just my 0.2 cents