If you have a defined a named graphic group you can use COPY the whole group with all its elements. But the result is not a Graphic Group any more.
I would like to get the copy to be another named graphic group - where the graphic groups name is incremented.
Like a unnamed graphic group is getting a new nummber when copied GG[1] > GG[2] ...
e. g. A named graphic group called "Workplace" should become Workplace[2] when copied.
Reply to: Marco Salino commented 20 Apr 10:37
.... would you like to create duplicates of its elements or reference the original ones?
I reckon referencing on this level is NOT desirable at all. So the elments shall be copied (included in Named Group with NG_Name_<incremented number> )
Sorry for the late reply - this got a bit of a new drive(see: https://communities.bentley.com/products/microstation/f/microstation-forum/219449/what-is-actually-a-graphic-group)
Right Marco, just a copy of the elements. Simply just increment the name of the group by adding a running number >NamedGroupName<[1] ... [2]
(like graphic groups numbers do increment GG[1] ... GG[2] when copied)
Put the effort into a Group arranging it in a particular way (with active and passive members) . Think of a Workplace with Desk, Chair, Computer etc.
You like to be able to copy that group, right? Workplace[1], Workplace[2],...
Nothing more.
Thanks for the feedback Gerd. And when copying a named group would you like to create duplicates of its elements or reference the original ones?
I guess you could/should just limit the level of complexity. Just do not allow nested or ref-ed elements. Who would want that anyway.The point was that without the ability to COPY a named group it is rather worthless in the first place.
Hi Gerd, we have looked at this in the past and it can quickly become very complex and not easy to manage. What if one of the named group member is a named group itself or in a reference file? When you copy a Named Group would you want to make copies of the elements or have the new named group poin to the same elements?
It was decided that the level of complexity this could introduce may overweight the benefits, this is way we are not going to implement this in the near future.
Jan Šlegr 4 months ago
Hi Gerd,
to understand you idea better: Do you mean Graphic group or Named group (no Named graphic group exists)?
Regards,
Jan
Gerd Eisenacher 4 months ago in reply to Jan Šlegr
Hi Jan,
Named Group it is then - somewhat irritating though.
As GG and NG are handeled under the same functionality dialog [Start>Groups>Add to Graphic Group] I was under the assumption that it is closely related. Hence my example with the "unnamed" Grapic Group.
MaryB 4 months ago
Yes, this is one of the reasons I have not been enamored of named groups - if I make a copy, it's not a named group, or group of any sort.
This would get past that limitation.
Gerd Eisenacher 4 months ago in reply to MaryB
Exactly,
who is creating named groups if you can't get another similar one copied?
The nice thing of named groups over GG is to have "active" and "passive" members. You do not have to go "lock ggroup toggle" when you move the whole group or single members. The passive members can be moved without the toggle. (wording could rather be?: main / sub)
I thought this would be implemented to be usefull eventually. But now I thought to bring it up again.
(Was there not some more functionality to the named groups in some earlier versions? I remember that you were able to see and handle the single members of each group - even flip them from "active(main)" to "passive(sub)" ?)