Need feedback on labels from metric users

[Chris Tenbrink]

When we added the ability to customize labels using Object Specific macros or Ruby macros, we exposed a set of functions that return parameters for different objects. For example, you can use a macro to populate the width, depth, and height into the label for a cabinet. For historical reasons in metric plans, our convention is that we return lengths for these quantities in cm. However, we've heard that most people designing in metric prefer to use mm almost exclusively. So my question is:

Would you prefer Object Specific and Ruby macros to ALWAYS return lengths in mm?

Another way to ask the question is this: is there ever a situation where you would prefer these quantities be returned in cm instead of mm?

If we make the change and switch to always return mm, it means labels that use these macros will look different in X4 than they did in X3. For example, If you specify a label for a cabinet as 'B%width%', in X3 the label would display as 'B60' and in X4 it would display as 'B600'.

[killa]

I am only new to both drafting and chief, but have been looking at plans every day for work for the last 4 years and have never once seen cm. We use mm here in Australia.

[michaeljames]

The normal standard for drafting buildings including fixtures etc is in metric mm (millimetres) for example 19950, 2505, 950 etc, if defining larger measurements such as boundarys or long distance measurements then they are express in m (metres) for example 45.250, 160.255 etc

[Tim Grindlay]

Exclusively mm for object labels would work for us. Or option for metres with 3 decimal places.

Everything else we do is in mm, except:

For Site or Location plans we use metres (not meters), (dimension primary format is good for this)

on that note, if in CAD detail we drew a site with lines as boundarys, if we could then assign a label in metres (m) to each line , and also show the angle in degrees as part of the label, it would reduce room for error by the user failing to update text

and for elevation levels we would try to use m with 3 decimal places, it would be great to see this in elevation and cross section view (on its own layer)

[portrait]

Interior designers, cabinet manufacturers or designers who mostly work on small spaces which requires a lot of details normally use milimeters here. (I guess at most of the 'metric' countries also.)
But architectures and engineers use centimeters as the primary unit for building drawings. So we also need to use centimeters for the cabinets. I'd go for the centimeters, but of course the best thing is giving the users the option of choosing the measurement unit of cabinet (and other) labels.

[Glenn Woodward]

Chris,

For architectural work (like window and door sizes, general dimensions, and all things that I can think of that require a label, etc) it is always mm.
We usually use sq m for site , house and room areas - that would apply to polyline areas, etc.

[nicholasnz]

Hi Chris

I use mm exclusively here in New Zealand and on work in Australia and the UK.

I think one of my first frustrations was with the use of cm in CA when I started and had some communication with CA staff about this. It has always been a pain to see headers sizes, amongst other things, as say 4.5 x 14 x 105 x 2. usually with the odd decimal point thrown in for good measure and no apparent reason. This reads as foreign to us as it does to you.

The ability to round to the nearest 5mm would be wonderful however, I'm just really happy you're attending to this (I hope) at all.

Thanks for the inquiry - goes a long way in my books when a software company asks it's users about their needs.

[kiwideziner]

mm only please please please

[Ross Young]

Centimeters are rarely (if at all) used in building work or in most scientific measurements, for that matter.

This is on the basis of increasing or decreasing steps to "powers of three" around the base measurement of a meter.

For general building measurements it goes:
10 to the - 3 meters = one millimetre
10 to the - 0 meters = one meter
10 to the 3 meters = one kilometer

Centimeters (10 to the-2 meters) are out of step, and can cause confusion.

[lbuttery]

Ross:

it also makes sense if converted to Imperial

1 cm = 2.54 inches - not very precise

1 mm = .0394 inches which falls between 1/16 and 1/32
which is decently precise for construction work

When doing as-builts I use my Disto Laser and measure to 1/16"

Lew

[Ross Young]

Lew
It will make more sense when you finally convert to metric over there..... is this happening soon?

[alexsl]

We are a half way there... as I am drinking 16.9 fl oz/500ml Dasani purified water...

[lbuttery]

It will make more sense when you finally convert to metric over there..... is this happening soon?


Ross:

I think you missed my point about precision

I'm agreeing that mm makes more sense than cm



I haven't been hoping and waiting for the US to go metric since the late 60's when I learned it in high school

I can't believe we remain so backward on this issue

I doubt if we are any closer to switching than we were back in the 70's when we started a 10 year conversion and then pulled the plug within a year or so

Lew

[Ross Young]

Anyway, don't want to divert the original question too much.

Being able to set the units as millimeters, and to specify the rounding to a figure (eg, nearest 1mm, 5mm or 10mm, or whatever) would be good......... possibly we can do this already so will have a look. If not, this would be ideal.

[M.A. Winterton]

In building yes always mm for demensions, except site plans which are metres and areas for rooms polylines etc sq.m

When meteric came in here they slipped in cm because it was closer to the old inche which people were used to, makes life very confusing as someone said in a above post. Only people that I can recall is curtain makers who talk in cm