Beyond the Paper

Beth's CAD Blog: Automatic DWF Publish in AutoCAD 2008

Beth Powell has a great article on her blog:

Automatic DWF Publish in AutoCAD 2008

Robin Capper references Beth's article and adds some information:

AutoCAD 2008 - Automatic DWF Publish?

The AutoCADder blog is also getting in on the action:

Instant DWF in AutoCAD 2008

Check it out.

AutoCAD 2008: DWF versus DWFx differences

XPS is Microsoft's XML Paper Specification. It is built-in to the Microsoft Vista operating system. An XPS Viewer will also be available on a variety of other Microsoft operating systems such as Windows XP. It is possible to download and install XPS viewing components so that XPS files are viewable in Internet Explorer 7.

DWF has been around since 1995. The format has evolved over time. Originally it was a single image that could be zoomed - much like a JPEG on steroids. Then an underlying page was added with a designated page size. This facilitated printing to scale. Although originally single page, the format was also enhanced to allow multiple pages.

This evolution is continuing. DWF is now being enhanced to be compliant with Microsoft XPS. This allows Microsoft to support the viewing of DWF files on Microsoft Vista without requiring users to install additional software. It also allows users who have installed XPS viewing components to view the files. Of course, anyone with Autodesk Design Review 2008 can also view, print, markup, and measure these files. So users can tell which DWF files are in this newest format, versus the millions of files that are in the old format, the extension for the new format DWF files is .dwfx. Hence this latest DWF format (version 7.0) is often called DWFx. (One technical publications writer once joking asked if we would also have DWFr, DWFpg-13, and DWFnc-17. No we will not. We will not have DWFxxx either.) Opening and saving DWFx files does take a little longer in Autodesk Design Review 2008 than corresponding DWF files.

As shipped, AutoCAD 2008 comes with the ability to publish DWF files. DWF publishing has been a part of AutoCAD since R13. As shipped, AutoCAD 2008 uses the DWF6 ePlot pc3 driver to create DWF files in the time honored (version 6.x) format. If you want to publish DWF files in the XPS compatible format, you will need to download and install a separate DWFx driver. Like Autodesk Design Review 2008, the project schedule for the DWFx Driver completed later than the ship date for AutoCAD 2008. That's why both of these applications are available separately.

When AutoCAD users decide to publish a DWF or a DWFx, AutoCAD Software Development Manager, Eileen Sinnott, and AutoCAD Senior Product Designer, Jon Page, note that there are some differences:

AutoCAD 2008	DWF	DWFx
install	DWF6 ePlot pc3 included	separate download and install of DWFx Driver
Sheet Set Manager Publish	available in 2008	available in 2008
Model or Paper Space (Layout) Publish	available in 2008	available in 2008 using page setup overrides (See Note)
Model or Paper Space (Layout) Plot	available in 2008	available in 2008
Markup Set Manager Load	available in 2008	planned for a future release
DWF Attach	available in 2008	planned for a future release
Auto Publish	available in 2008	planned for a future release
File Size	typically 1/20th the size of the DWG	typically 1/10th the size of the DWG (See Comments section)

Note: Publishing a DWFx with the Publish command is possible. Similar to the Sheet Set Manager Publish capability, it will require the same page setup override to be applied to all sheets. Page setups are different for the Model tab and Layout tabs. Since the page setup needs to be the same for all sheets for DWFx, you can not mix them in a multi-sheet DWFx. The Sheet Set Manager ensures this for AutoCAD by only containing Layouts as sheets and applies the same page setup override to all sheets.

General Note: Multi-sheet creation will require the new PUBLISHCOLLATE sysvar to be set to 1.

This is the first release of DWFx publishing. As the format evolves, so too will the associated capabilities from AutoCAD. For AutoCAD users who have a desire to share design data with users who only need to view and print - who also do not have the free Autodesk Design Review 2008, DWFx is a viable alternative to traditional DWF files. For users who wish to take advantage of the round trip electronic review process, for now, DWF is still the answer.

Autodesk Design Review 2008: JT Import Feature Overview

JT is a 3D data format developed by UGS Corporation and used for product visualization and CAD data exchange. One of the new features of Autodesk Design Review 2008 is the ability to import a JT file. The file gets converted to a 3D DWF. The ability to import JT files is available as a plug-in for Autodesk Design Review. When released, it can be downloaded from:

www.autodesk.com/dwf-plugins

A JT file is imported and converted to 3D DWF by:

1. When you open Autodesk Design Review 2008 without specifying a DWF file, this is what you see:
   
   Notice how the Autodesk logo is now in black. "Luke, I am your father..."

2. Without a DWF file already open, the Import capability is not available from the File menu. Grrrrr!
   

3. So you can open a dummy DWF file.
   
   Longtime Autodesk customer, Charles Bliss of Applied Mechanics, has created a dummy DWF file called EmptyBase.DWF explicitly for this purpose. Thanks Charles.

4. With a DWF file open, Import is now available from the file menu.
   

5. Selecting import brings up the Import dialog. You can use the pull down to select the desired file type - this case, JT.
   
   As installed, Autodesk Design Review also imports DWG and DXF files. Importing of DGN files is available via another plug-in that will also eventually be available on www.autodesk.com/dwf-plugins.

6. Using the standard Windows browsing technique, you navigate to the desired folder and pick the desired JT file.
   

7. Autodesk Design Review imports the JT file and converts it to a 3D DWF.
   
   The viewing, printing, markup, and measurement capabilities of Autodesk Design Review are now available for that design data.

The ability to get different forms of data into DWF, e.g. Microsoft Word documents, Microsoft Excel workbooks, Microsoft Project schedules is available via the Autodesk DWF Writer for 2D. The DWF Writer for 3D captures data via OpenGL. In addition to the DWF Writer, Autodesk Design Review supports opening various image file formats. Support for other forms of data has now been extended in the 3D realm with the inclusion of the JT import feature. Whether data is in an Autodesk format or not, it can be placed into DWF. Having one file format that can house all of your project data, in one file, for all of your project members, that can be shared across the entire life cycle of your project, really makes DWF go beyond the paper.

Autodesk Design Review 2008: Supported Platforms

Autodesk Design Review 2008 is now available as a download from the Autodesk web site.

My posting of Is your system ready for Autodesk Design Review 2008 prompted many questions regarding Windows Vista. There are eleven flavors of Windows Vista yet our system requirements only list Windows Vista Ultimate Edition. The decision to do so is a reflection of where we have fully certified Autodesk Design Review to install and operate; however, some limited testing occurs on other operating systems as part of our release process.

Operating System	Processor	Browser	Coverage
Windows Vista Ultimate	32-bit	IE7	full testing
	64-bit	IE7	full testing
Windows Vista Enterprise	32-bit	IE7	limited testing
	64-bit	IE7	limited testing
Windows Vista Business	32-bit	IE7	limited testing
	64-bit	IE7	limited testing
Windows Vista Home Premium	32-bit	IE7	limited testing
	64-bit	IE7	limited testing
Windows Vista Home Basic	32-bit	IE7	limited testing
	64-bit	IE7	limited testing
Windows Vista Starter	32-bit	IE7	no testing
Windows XP Professional	32-bit	IE7	full testing
		IE6	full testing
	64-bit	IE7	full testing
		IE6	full testing
Windows XP Home	32-bit	IE7	full testing
		IE6	full testing
Windows 2000 SP4	32-bit	IE7	full testing
		IE6	full testing

Note that like AutoCAD and some other Autodesk applications, Autodesk Design Review 2008 leverages OpenGL hardware acceleration for 3D graphics. A software rendering pipeline is available for systems like Windows Vista that support Direct3D instead of OpenGL. Your mileage may vary. In addition, due to differences in the system architecture of Microsoft Vista as compared to other versions of Windows, there are a few known issues for Autodesk Design Review on Vista. These are documented in the Autodesk Design Review 2008 Read Me. You can try Autodesk Design Review 2008 on the flavors of Windows Vista that have not undergone full testing. From a technical standpoint, it will probably work. It's just that we do not list these other flavors in our system requirements, because we do not conduct full feature testing on these operating system variations. As such these are considered unsupported platforms.

Humor: Autodesk Labs (part 2)

With all of the Project Freewheel discussions on the Autodesk Labs site, when Lead Technical Writer, Chris Blocher, saw this graphic (created by Michael Koelsch) on the Popular Science Web site, he shared it with me.

Autodesk Labs (http://labs.autodesk.com) is our home for new prototypes, experiments, applications, and technologies. Autodesk Labs analyzes and develops new and viable market driven business ideas. Created by the development teams at Autodesk, these technologies include everything from web services to plug-ins to new applications. Customer feedback from Autodesk Labs helps us decide the future of our projects.

Project Freewheel down: Friday, Feb 23, 2007 from 3:00 - 7:00 pm PT

The Project Freewheel production service is currently down. This is a planned 4 hour outage that will allow us to upgrade our technology preview to a more robust and reliable environment. Thank you for your patience and your ongoing interest in Freewheel.

[Project Freewheel is now back up.]

Make Sure Digital Files are Complete Before Sending for Printing

On his The Blueprint blog, John Cronin noted that there is a focus in the reprographics industry on charging for digital services. The International Reprographics Association (IRgA) has created a committee to set standards for charging more. As an Autodesk employee sympathetic to Autodesk customers, I am saddened by this news. Imagine if an airline charged me more for booking a flight electronically instead of calling their 800 number to talk to an agent. After all, someone has to pay for web servers, internet connections, and software to book the reservations and collect the money. Extra charges for services like file creation (e.g. publishing plot files from a set of AutoCAD drawings) or file storage/archiving (keeping masters around for reprinting) seem like fair game, but should I really pay more for printouts because I email a reprographer a DWF file instead of providing a master copy? After all, the time it takes for the print operator to scan in my master is eliminated. In the grand scheme of things, this seems like a wash.

The IRgA standard lists the difficulties that reprographers face when working with digital files:

1. The art and science of organizing and distributing high fidelity, project-critical content from digital files grows more and more complex every day.
2. Additional expertise is required to handle jobs, and more communication is required – from the digital operator, to the salesperson, to the customer – to get the job right.
3. As a reprographer accepts digital files, he or she must look for missing fonts and graphics, software limitations, corrupt files, file conversion problems, and other unexpected digital anomalies.
4. 50-70% of jobs submitted in a digital format are incomplete!

To mitigate these issues, the IRgA standard suggests that when providing digital files, reprographic customers should:

1. Include all support graphics and links.
2. Include graphics in a proper resolution (for the equipment to be used).
3. Include all screen and filter fonts.
4. Include complete instructions with day/night contact numbers (based on your store’s hours of operation).
5. Contact the store sales representative or owner if the job is complicated, or if it will require special attention.
6. Include a color go-by for matching color or color samples. Color matching cannot be guaranteed without a go-by (aka: mock-up or comp). Colors on a monitor or local printer may not match the output device selected.

As someone also sympathetic to the reprographers' plight, if you don't want to be charged more, you need to do your part to ensure a smooth workflow that starts with design software, e.g. AutoCAD, Revit, Inventor, and makes it all the way through to the paper. Perhaps the extra charges should only apply if the submitted job was incomplete? DWF can go beyond paper, but it has to get to paper first. Doing that optimally costs everyone less - reprographers and Autodesk customers alike. By working together, everyone wins.

Autodesk CIP: We are not evil

We are not evil. There are bloggers who like to make names for themselves by depicting us as evil, but we are just regular people who come to work every day just like you. So when one of our products, like Autodesk Design Review 2008, asks you to participate in our Customer Improvement Program (CIP), we're not trying to collect data from you to learn what competitive products you have. We don't care what porn sites you've visited. :-) We're not trying to steal your credit card information. All we want to do is gather data on how you use our products, so that we can make them better.

When you invoke Autodesk Design Review without a DWF file, it looks like:

OK, the Autodesk logo is in black. Yes this conjures images of Darth Vader. That's just our new look. The Autodesk web site will soon get a makeover and reflect this imagery. I guess black is the new black. But I digress...

From the Autodesk Design Review start page, you can invoke the CIP feature.

Once invoked, you will see a dialog that looks like:

If you elect to participate, Autodesk Design Review will "phone home" with information about your usage of Autodesk Design Review. When Autodesk Design Review sends data back to Autodesk, it includes items like: General Operating system, graphics hardware, I/O devices Startup, Exit, and crash counts Autodesk Design Review specific Commands executed while using Autodesk Design Review Applications that have hosted DWF files, e.g. Microsoft Word Time to load DWF documents Number (how many?) and types of sections (2D?, 3D?) in DWF files Applications to create your DWF files Paper sizes that appear in DWF files Indicator if DWF files have measurement, printing, or markup disabled

A random 100k sample of the collected data is sent once every 24 hours. As of now, there is no way for users lookup the data before it is being sent. The data is encoded as it is emitted. This is done simply to reduce size for transmission. Individually the information is of little value; however, when combined with data from like-minded users who want to help us improve our products, it provides usage patterns that tell us things like what commands are the most popular.

DWF is designed to go beyond the paper. With your assistance, we can hone in on ways to go even further. So please consider participating. Fear not. We are not evil.

Autodesk Design Review 2008: Navigation Palette Enhancement Overview

In an earlier blog posting, I mentioned what's new in Autodesk Design Review 2008. In addition to the new features, there are enhancements to existing ones. One these enhancements is greater control for the Navigation Pane. The content in this blog posting is a "mutation" of the information you will find in the Autodesk Design Review 2008 help file created by Chris Blocher, Jonathan Geary, and Kim Schaefer of the Technical Publications group at our Ithaca, New York office. The Navigation Pane organizes all of the elements of a DWF file that accompany the graphics.

In particular, the Navigator Pane Toolbar is particularly handy.

The Navigator Tool Bar lets you manage all of the palettes at the same time. This is possible with 5 items (left to right):

1. The Restore button undoes Navigator Pane layout changes.
2. The Unrestore button redoes Navigator Pane layout changes.
3. The Distribute All button equally spaces all expanded, undocked palettes.
4. The Collapse All button closes all undocked palettes.
5. The Navigator Pane Options button provides the ability to: select a predefined Navigator Pane layout, save a current layout as a defined layout, or restore the layout defaults. This is new, so let's expand on that.

Design Review’s palettes are dynamic in that the layout of the palettes changes automatically depending upon which tool you have selected. For example, when you Cross Section a 3D model, upon engaging the Cross Section tool the Navigator Pane is reconfigured, displaying the Contents and Cross Sections palettes. Many times we fiddle with the layout of the various panes and get them just like we want them. Autodesk Design Review lets us save these palette adjustments. In addition, it comes with 3 predefined layouts:

1. Markups Layout. Opens the Contents, Markups, and Properties palettes. This layout is displayed for adding markup or dimensioning objects on the canvas.
2. Cross Sections Layout. Opens the Contents and Cross Sections palettes. This layout is displayed for sectioning 3D objects.
3. Animations Layout. Maximizes the Views Palette and collapses all others. This layout is used when viewing animations which, if any are present, are listed under Presentations in the Views Palette.

In addition to the Navigator Tool Bar, each palette title bar has 5 user interface elements:

1. Double clicking the title bar itself expands or collapses the palette.
2. expands or contracts the palette.
3. maximizes the palette.
4. hides the palette. It appears at the bottom as a tag .
5. has functionality specify to each palette. For example, this provides access to Delete for the Markups palette. For the Layers palette, it provides access to Layer(s) ON and Layer(s) Off capabilities.

Hiding and showing a palette determines whether or not a palette is displayed in the Navigator Pane. Hiding a palette removes it from the Navigator Pane and places the palette icon in a dock at the bottom of the Navigator Pane. Unlike hiding and showing a palette, which controls whether or not a palette is accessible in the Navigator Pane, double-clicking a palette’s title bar in the Navigator Pane expands or collapses the palette. These two operations are different.

A DWF is more than just the graphics. The extra data is what allows it to go beyond the paper. Providing user control over how much or little of that data is displayed is a handy enhancement of Autodesk Design Review 2008.

Version Compare: A simple polygon example

The Autodesk Design Review 2008: DWF Version Compare article provides an overview of how the new Version Compare feature works. The Version Compare: A simple polyline example article provides a simple example of how comparisons for polylines work. This article takes the same approach for polylines but does so for polygons.

For the polyline article I:

1. Created a DWG file with 9 polylines.
2. Published a DWF file containing the 9 polylines.
3. Converted the DWF file to ASCII and saved it as the original DWF file.
4. Made a copy of the ASCII DWF file, edited it with a Text Editor, and saved the copy as the modified DWF file.
5. Compared the original DWF file to the modified DWF file and reported the results.

The purpose of the polyline test was to determine if tiny changes, with all other things being exactly equal, would be detected by the Version Compare feature. Except for color, a known limitation, they were. For this article, the purpose is to demonstrate how changes in AutoCAD affect Version Compare results in the published DWF files. An AutoCAD polygon is the geometric primitive being tested.

For the polygon case covered by this article, the approach is the basically the same as the polyline case with a few twists to make cover other aspects of Version Compare. So I:

1. Created a DWG file with 11 polygons and saved it as dwf_compare_polygons1.dwg.
2. Published a DWF file containing the 11 polygons as dwf_compare_polygon1-Layout1.dwf.
   
3. Made a copy of dwf_compare_polygons1.dwg and saved it as dwf_compare_polygons2.dwg.
4. Edited dwf_compare_polygons2.dwg to make the desired changes to 10 of the polygons - leaving one untouched.
5. Published a DWF file containing the 11 polygons as dwf_compare_polygon2-Layout1.dwf.
   
6. Combined dwf_compare_polygon1-Layout1.dwf and dwf_compare_polygon2-Layout1.dwf, renamed the sheets to revision1 and revision2, and saved the new DWF file as dwf_compare_polygon1.dwf.
7. Used the compare dialog Options button
   
   
   
   to specify red for Additions and blue for Deletions. By default, just like what Autodesk Architecture does for DWG comparisons, Additions are green and deletions are red. I wanted to highlight the additions, so I selected red for my Additions color. In deference to those who are red/green color blind, I selected blue for my Deletions color.
8. Compared the revision1 sheet to revision2 sheet using just the one DWF file. Now the first sheet contained the markups.
9. Inserted the unmarked up original sheet from dwf_compare_polygon1-Layout1.dwf.
10. Reordered and renamed the sheets to have revision1, revision2, and revision1 with markups.

The net effect of these steps is that unlike the polyline article where I compared two different DWF files, I compared two sheets in the same DWF file. This worked. I feared I might get some kind of sharing violation, since the DWF file was already open, but it was allowed. After renaming the sheets, I was left with one DWF file that contained three sheets: the first revision, the second revision, and the first revision with the markups generated by the Version Compare of the first two sheets.

Download dwf_compare_polygons.dwf (117.3K)

Now let's talk about the changes between the sheets:

• No difference - This is the control group or baseline.
• Vertex added - The 5 point polygon changed to a 6 point polygon by using grip edit to insert an additional vertex.
• Vertex deleted - The 5 point polygon changed to a 4 point polygon by using grip edit to make one vertex coincident with another.
• Vertex changed - The point at the apex of the polygon was lowered by using grip edit.
• Edge color - The polygon was placed on a layer whose color was green.
• Edge pattern - The polygon was placed on a layer whose line pattern was dashed space. This also required setting of a line type scale which was applied to both the original and modified DWG files. In addition, I added a small line near the polygon, so it was easy to see that the pattern for the layer had indeed been applied.
• Edge weight - The polygon was moved to a layer whose line weight was noticeably thicker.
• Face color - A SOLID hatch of green was applied to a polygon. A SOLID hatch of magenta had been applied to all of the polygons in the original DWG.
• Hatch - The hatch was modified from ANSI31 to GRASS.
• Gradient - The gradient pattern was modified from a circular pattern to one oriented about a center line.
• Region - In the original, a region was formed using one of the polygons and a circle. A CORK hatch pattern was applied. For the modified DWG file, a HONEY pattern was applied.

Upon comparing the two sheets in the same DWF file:

The results were basically as expected:

• No difference - This shows an unexpected difference. Software developer, Neil Wan, analyzed my sheets to determine that the polygon in question actually consists of one triangle and three trapezoids. There are small differences in some of this geometry (highlighted in red):

  In revision1:    T 3 2147157453,286666        2147156735,286144        2147158171,286144    T 4 2147155874,285519        2147159032,285519        2147156735,286144        2147158171,286144    T 4 2147155155,284997        2147159751,284997        2147155874,285519        2147159032,285519    T 4 2147127624,264994        2147187282,264994        2147155155,284997        2147159751,284997

  In revision2:    T 3 2147157453,286666        2147156735,286144        2147158171,286144    T 4 2147154821,284754        2147160085,284754        2147156735,286144        2147158171,286144    T 4 2147139027,273279        2147175879,273279        2147154821,284754        2147160085,284754    T 4 2147127624,264994        2147187282,264994        2147139027,273279        2147175879,273279

  This is an artifact of the publishing process. Version Compare is very precise in this regard.
• Vertex added - The deformed area based on the additional vertex is highlighted as an addition (red).
• Vertex deleted - The area removed by deleting the vertex is highlighted as a deletion (blue).
• Vertex changed - By lowering the top vertex point, the original area is shown as deleted (blue) and the resulting area is shown as added (red).
• Edge color - The edge color change from black to green is not detected. This will be included in a future release.
• Edge pattern - The original solid edge appears as a deletion (blue). The dashed edge as well as the extra line appear as additions (red).
• Edge weight - The wider edge appears as an addition (red). Through obscured by the wider red edge, the original edge appears as a deletion (blue). The blue edge can be brought to the forefront by selection the Deletions markup item.
• Face color - The face color change from magenta to green is not detected. This will be part of a future release.
• Hatch - The geometry from the ANSI31 pattern appears as a deletion (blue). The geometry for the GRASS pattern appears as an addition (red). As these patterns are sparse, the red and blue appear to mix in the polygon.
• Gradient - The mixture of original and new gradient pattern occurs much like what happens for hatch.
• Region - The hatch and gradient comparison for polygons apply equally to regions.

My work with polygons today reminds me of a line from a Todd Rundgren song called " Born to Synthesize":

Pyramids, spheres, and obelisks are the patterns of all creation
But the red polygon's only desire is to get to the blue triangle

Red is the lowest color in the spectrum. Blue is higher. A triangle is the most stable 2D polygonal shape. In short, the polygon wants to better itself. Now on what other CAD blog will you get rock 'n' roll trivia like that?

The Version Compare feature errs on the side of caution. It is better to identify a piece of geometry as changed, although it may not really have, instead of ignore a piece of geometry that really has changed. This should be taken into consideration when using the feature. Version Compare can't determine if the polygon has made it from red to blue, but it sure can tell when geometry becomes a triangle.