The issue of "folders" as part of a nested layer solution is nice, but
a complex (however desirable) undertaking.
It does seem to meld the Layout presentation of groups/comps with the
current simple layers list. I have not used layout much at all, so I
can't really comment further on it.
There is a Ruby called "Layer Management" which almost does the
"folder" thing by allowing named groups of selected layers to be made
visible/invisible. I use it but it would be more useful if it were
made part of layers, rather than having to call it up each time to use
The simple short term solution is akin to my suggestion.
"Regarding jgb suggestions to transfer everything to layer 0 when
importing does not really satisfy the requirement.
Sometimes it may be preferable to keep the layer structure of the
imported model/component so by it being brought in
on, say, a preselected 'master' layer and retaining its own unique sub
layering could be advantageous."
I beg to differ. Reassigning all to layer0 is only #2 of the 3
options. Option #1, import layers "as is" does satisfy your
requirement. And option #3 allows you to rename any 1, some or all
incoming layers, in any fashion you chose, before it merges and messes
with the existing layers.
Adding a materials "list by component/layer" would be too much to ask
for at this time. There are far more important issues to solve for
the SU development gurus to spend their time on. Near field clipping,
open gap polygons, on face but non-planar, hyper-zoom, are just a few
of the critical ones that have remained problems for way too long.
On Aug 25, 7:26 am, mysearch <keithhal...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> I would have thought that the SU developers already have a blueprint
> for nested layers, nested components and nested material that is
> readily understood by all its users, i.e. outliner aka nested groups.
> If you change the terminology of the anchor point from groups to
> folder you have the universally understood concept of nested files/
> objects of any description.
> If so, allow users to created, rename and delete recursive anchor-
> points, i.e. folders, in all 4 of the key management interfaces within
> SU, i.e. outliner, layers, components and materials. This way you give
> the flexibility back to the user to organise their models within any
> hierarchical structure they wish. It also extends the consistency of
> operation in-line with outliner to all management interfaces.
> With regard to the idea forward by jgb and commented on by tacarr,
> importing a component with all the potential implications on the
> organisation of layers, components and materials, these could all go
> into a default ‘folder’ within the respective interfaces without the
> complexity of N options. From my experience it seems essential that
> any reasonably sized model would have already organised their model
> out of the default folders. After importing the component, the user
> could then simply create an appropriate folder within each category,
> i.e. layers, components and materials, that meets their needs.
> N.B. The model report would also be a nice feature listing all named
> On Aug 25, 7:22 am, tacarr <tac...@iname.com> wrote:
> > A posting from msp in 'SketchUp Pro>Groups and Layers' describes the
> > problem of reassigning
> > a nested group to a new layer. This requirement could also be
> > incorporated within
> > the suggested 'Nested Layers Feature'
> > On Aug 25, 2:28 am, bob <sbva...@xs4all.nl> wrote:
> > > This seems a fair suggestion. Storing sub layers in a folder would
> > > make the layer window more readable. Mysearch has a point too, by also
> > > mentioning Components, Outliner, and (last but not least) materials.
> > > It all seems to evolve around keeping all those things together and
> > > under control. All the options in Sketchup asure lots is possible, but
> > > that you also need to be very carefull.
> > > Materials - when you have very carefully brought the number of
> > > materials under control, it can be distressing to import a single
> > > Warehouse component.
> > > Outliner - you can not see your component hyrarchy separate of your
> > > layer organisation, when you want to USE BOTH.
> > > Component Window - should have a search function
> > > Layer Window - lacks any functionality
> > > It has been suggested, there should be a Window that more or less
> > > combines both Outliner and the Layer Window. I think there is much to
> > > say for that.
> > > On Aug 24, 3:23 pm, tacarr <tac...@iname.com> wrote:
> > > > Regarding jgb suggestions to transfer everything to layer 0 when
> > > > importing does not really satisfy the requirement.
> > > > Sometimes it may be preferable to keep the layer structure of the
> > > > imported model/component so by it being brought in
> > > > on, say, a preselected 'master' layer and retaining its own unique sub
> > > > layering could be advantageous.
> > > > Using this systen within the master model would also fall inline with
> > > > jgb's layering convention e.g. 4.00 Wing
> > > > would be seen in the listing whereas all sub layers would be
> > > > unexpanded. This could be carried down to lower levels
> > > > to further enhance the hierarchical discipline of the model.
> > > > On Aug 24, 7:49 pm, Scc <gai...@gaieus.hu> wrote:
> > > > > I second this one!
> > > > > :-)
> > > > > Gai...
> > > > > On Aug 24, 1:03 pm, jgb <jgber...@rogers.com> wrote:
> > > > > > I too have had this problem, not only with components, but with
> > > > > > objects imported from my other drawings. Layer0 is not so much a
> > > > > > problem as simply unnamed layer1 and layer2 objects.
> > > > > > To prevent that, I no longer use unnamed layers. I use a fairly
> > > > > > developed hierarchy of layers using numeric prefixes, to keep track of
> > > > > > the structure. In that way I can create a master model (i.e. an
> > > > > > airplane) and then develop detailed separate sub models of complex
> > > > > > parts, such as the wings, passenger cabins, etc. Each section of the
> > > > > > master drawing is given its master number, (i.e. 4.00 Wing) and in the
> > > > > > wing sub drawing, that is expanded to the various wing components,
> > > > > > such as 4.30 Engines. That way when I move a detail back to the
> > > > > > master drawing, or pull in other major parts from any other drawings,
> > > > > > the layers all fall neatly into place. No doubt, many using SU do a
> > > > > > similar construct.
> > > > > > However, incorporating other components or parts of other peoples
> > > > > > models will not fit my hierarchy. In severe cases, I've had to do an
> > > > > > intermediate import to a blank sheet, redefine the layers and then
> > > > > > import to my drawing.
> > > > > > What should happen, though, is when any object is imported into any
> > > > > > multi layered drawing, SU should present 3 choices.
> > > > > > 1- Import layers as is (the current default),
> > > > > > 2- Change all incoming layers to layer0, which includes all nested
> > > > > > layered elements, and
> > > > > > 3- Rename all/some incoming layers.
> > > > > > This is akin to deleting a layer in SU. That would solve the problem.
> > > > > > jgb
> > > > > > On Aug 24, 2:47 am, tacarr <tac...@iname.com> wrote:
> > > > > > > I have read with interest the discussion regarding 'Layer
> > > > > > > Containment'. Having built a rather large model using Layer '0' as the
> > > > > > > 'working' layer and then grouping and transferring to a new, named,
> > > > > > > layer I have come across a problem when importing a component from,
> > > > > > > say, 3D Wharehouse. The newly added component can have its own
> > > > > > > layering convention and when it is incorporated into the master model
> > > > > > > the layers are just inserted into the layer listing causing,
> > > > > > > sometimes, confusion within a carefully constructed layer list.
> > > > > > > My suggestion is to enable the layer list to be 'nested' in a similar
> > > > > > > way to the Outliner window, thus when a component is added the
> > > > > > > associated layers are contained within the 'Master' layer. These sub
> > > > > > > layers can then be viewed as required and not clutter up the original
> > > > > > > model listing.
> > > > > > > This, I feel, would greatly increase the power of the layer window by
> > > > > > > simplifying the access to the elements of an imported component and
> > > > > > > removing the confusion of an 'unruly' layer listing.- Hide quoted text -
> > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
> - Show quoted text -