We're talking about basic modeling before one goes out to buy supplies.
This is what we need badly right now for the OS movement in general. It is sad to see the inspiring open-HW-movement dragging along designing 3D-geometry with inadequate tools like blender or sketchup. Discussing the features of existing CAD SW will not do. Important is what the OSE project and most other open mechanical HW projects really need. If you want more than a few people join in the development (crowd development) then you need a tailored free and open source HW development tool-chain which also allows easy model distribution and easy change management. This is not in existence as of now (end of 2013) and therefore also no large crowd development can be happening.Ĭurrent CAD files save the 3D-geometry-data. And the most often used transfer formats like STEP and IGES also contain 3D-geometry-data. These files are bulky, difficult to share over the internet and contain only dumb 3D data without parametrization etc. In terms of SW development 3D-geometry-data corresponds to compiled executables. However in open SW projects they manage source code and its changes not executables for good reasons. In 3D-CAD the source code corresponds to the sequence of commands that created the 3D-geometry-data. The scripts creating the 3D-geometry-data are the source code. This should be distributed, collected and version controlled not the geometry data. The scripting command language should be standardised rather than the 3D-geometry-data formats. The actual CAD tool would act like a compiler or interpreter by locally turning the source code into 3D-geometry-data. But as in the so-called build-system of SW development you might keep the locally compiled object code (single 3D-geometry-objects) in separate files such that only the changed objects and depending ones have to be recompiled.
Brl cad drwa software#
Since these CAD scripts are text they can be managed like software source code e.g.
0 kommentar(er)
