[Ticket #4249] Move versus edit objects

Have some feature requests, feedback, cool stuff to share, or want to know where FreeCAD is going? This is the place.
Forum rules
Be nice to others! Read the FreeCAD code of conduct!
User avatar
Pauvres_honteux
Posts: 728
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 12:05 am
Location: Far side of the moon

[Ticket #4249] Move versus edit objects

Post by Pauvres_honteux »

Hi, this feature request is a bit pressing since it makes it really hard to see what the original position was of an object. Further it is extreamly non consistent how editing works on/for objects in general.
I hereby request the following:
.
Move/Translate shall be started as a separate command from the toolbar.
Further; the move shall have a representation in the tree.
And finally the move shall be done on a linked copy of the object.
The original object shall automatically be hidden.
The hidden object shall be available for further manipulation / linking.
When double clicking on the Move icon in the tree it shall show a pop-up window with the "translation"-values, whatever they were when created and be editable.

It shall NOT be started as a double click on the object or in the tree!!!

Additionally: the Move/Translate lack support for moving in the plane (X-Y,Y-Z,Z-X or any plane/line chosen by the user).
Move_Translate_5.png
Move_Translate_5.png (74.67 KiB) Viewed 1582 times
.
.
.
Double clicking on an object shall result in a pop-up window containing anything editible for that object.
It shall NOT show Move/Translate!
Editible stuff shall be allowed to be picked from both 3D window AND the tree. This holds for EVERY object in FreeCAD!
Someone please make a general pop-up window all other developers, easily, can populate with what they find suitable for their object.
.
Move_Translate_4.png
Move_Translate_4.png (125.06 KiB) Viewed 1582 times
Last edited by Pauvres_honteux on Sat May 08, 2021 7:47 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
saso
Veteran
Posts: 1913
Joined: Fri May 16, 2014 1:14 pm
Contact:

Re: [Feature request] Move versus edit objects

Post by saso »

This is something that is also on my mind now for some time, so I understand your suggestion, but I think you are attacking to solve it from a wrong direction... IMO this has deeper logic in to ordered and un-ordered tree structure; feature based vs direct modeling and implicit (associative) vs explicit modeling concepts. For example when the cube is placed like this as in your example, you have to understand that in FreeCAD by default this is more similar as if you place an "as result" copy of an solid (body), it is basically not attached (not associated) to anything and such objects you can move around freely also in Catia, by placing the compass on it, so in such situations IMO the current FreeCAD behavior is actually ok, but I fully agree with you that in other situations it should work as you have suggested, that is, to have a translate tool (menu button) and that this translation would show in the history tree.

But this is actually getting in to the core of my continuous complaining (or whining as some like to see it :)), the fact that some of the above mentioned concepts are all mixed up in FreeCAD and it is IMO clear that developers and users don't understand them. In associative modeling (fully parametric as we often like to call it) the complete model, from the first line in the first sketch to the most top assembly component, everything is fully connected. And the tree of the model has to clearly represent this and it has to read as a recipe, so that it is very clear already just from reading the tree why the model looks the way it does. And so yes, as you said in your example, also when you move something (or rotate) this has to be shown in the tree, if you want to understand what/how/when something has moved from its original position (I am sure you understand this, but as a note to others). IMO people are to much focusing on just the visual representation of the model (which is common for the more direct modeling and polygon modeling programs), statements like "but look how great looking models people are creating" actually have no meaning, one is able to create awesome visual models in blender or also sketchup, but this has nothing to do with why people are using parametric modeling programs or with what we are (at least I hope so) trying to do with FreeCAD. And this is also why I often have the feeling that we are actually moving backward in development, because even when we get new features they are implemented often without understanding and taking in to considerations this concepts of fully parametric modeling.

When I read people trying to use (or even push the development to go in such direction) Part containers as Autocad blocks, or Compounds as Part containers or similar, it gives me shivers down my spine but I am also fed up continuously arguing about the same things and a bit loosing faith in the project... How many times have user like you, freecad-heini-1, Zolko, (me? if I may include my self in this circle :)) come up with reasonable suggestions and agreement on what would be a good direction for development, that was then completely ignored or even talked down and locked.
Last edited by saso on Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:51 pm, edited 7 times in total.
carlopav
Veteran
Posts: 2062
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2018 1:49 pm
Location: Venice, Italy

Re: [Feature request] Move versus edit objects

Post by carlopav »

IMO this looks like a good feature request for PartDesign module (expecially for mechanical design). +1
AFAICS in many other modules the tree structure and the transformation actions have different needs, and it's sometimes not necessary for them to be fully parametric.
follow my experiments on BIM modelling for architecture design
chrisb
Veteran
Posts: 53285
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 9:14 am

Re: [Feature request] Move versus edit objects

Post by chrisb »

Can you please confirm if I understand it right: the transform tool should create a clone or simple copy of its source object?
A Sketcher Lecture with in-depth information is available in English, auf Deutsch, en français, en español.
User avatar
Pauvres_honteux
Posts: 728
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 12:05 am
Location: Far side of the moon

Re: [Feature request] Move versus edit objects

Post by Pauvres_honteux »

saso wrote: Sat Jan 04, 2020 12:56 pm
+1 I'm totally with you there!
.
carlopav wrote: Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:30 pm ... sometimes not necessary for them to be fully parametric.
... adding: the user must click on a separate button to shut off the parametric stuff, dead modelling shall not be the default anywhere in FreeCAD.
User avatar
Pauvres_honteux
Posts: 728
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 12:05 am
Location: Far side of the moon

Re: [Feature request] Move versus edit objects

Post by Pauvres_honteux »

chrisb wrote: Sat Jan 04, 2020 1:41 pm ... create a clone or simple copy of its source object?
.
A linked non-editable copy of the source object. The original object is the master. The linked copy is the slave.
RatonLaveur
Posts: 991
Joined: Wed Mar 27, 2019 10:45 am

Re: [Feature request] Move versus edit objects

Post by RatonLaveur »

Non parametric vs. parametric [placement/movement/location] has been a pet peeve of mine too in FreeCAD. The inability to know where the central reference of a part is (example: when receiving a step file) and to modify it clearly has a way of confusing me. Any step in the direction of clearer control is a good step in my book.
User avatar
Pauvres_honteux
Posts: 728
Joined: Sun Feb 16, 2014 12:05 am
Location: Far side of the moon

Re: [Feature request] Move versus edit objects

Post by Pauvres_honteux »

One more who likes this proposal:
vocx
Veteran
Posts: 5197
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2018 9:18 pm

Re: [Feature request] Move versus edit objects

Post by vocx »

saso wrote: Sat Jan 04, 2020 12:56 pm ... so that it is very clear already just from reading the tree why the model looks the way it does. ....
The problem with this is that you want to be extremely historical, that is, record every single instruction in the model. This can be done but is often unnecessary. One of the key features of a CAD program is that there is more than one way to achieve a result (a 3D model).

This particular example of movement doesn't make much sense to me. If I am at A, and move two steps towards B, and then move two steps back towards A, I end up in the same initial point. You could argue that you should record this translation even if it ends up in the same place. I think it's unnecessary; you can just record the final position. Being extremely pedantic at some of these things is not going to help you model a particular design better, it's just going to increase the complexity of the instruction list.

This is similar to how Git works. If I make a commit, and then make another commit erasing what I previously did, I achieved nothing, I just added two commits to the commit history. So, it is better to squash the operations and return a true commit, if it in fact changes the initial state.
How many times have user like you, freecad-heini-1, Zolko, (me? if I may include my self in this circle :)) come up with reasonable suggestions...
I don't see suggestions and clear proposals. I see vague suggestions, wishes, with vague write ups about how something should work, or not work. I need proper descriptions, with examples, and mockups. I don't see this from most people.

And just so everybody who is reading this know, FreeCAD was started as a sort of clone of Catia, which could be described as one of the most important CAD programs in actuality, particularly in Europe (French, German, etc. industries make heavy use of it). Some people truly want that, a clone of Catia. Many proposals that are made are just features that exist in Catia. But whether being a clone of Catia (or another software) is the ultimate goal of the project is not going to be decided overnight; FreeCAD is free software, so it can evolve and transcend its original intentions because there is no time-table or deadlines to do this; we can work towards a different "best", not necessarily what commercial software consider their best.
Always add the important information to your posts if you need help. Also see Tutorials and Video tutorials.
To support the documentation effort, and code development, your donation is appreciated: liberapay.com/FreeCAD.
Post Reply