@chrisglasier said:

Click here to open picture, then try to touch his nose with the cursor.

There's some more interactive presentations here - interesting innovative use of video as well as quite funny.

Direct the Dutch obsession of hoovering the lawn!

Click here to open picture, then try to touch his nose with the cursor.

@alan fraser said:

Yes, I can certainly see the point and usefulness of that scenario, Chris. But surely that could already be achieved with present technology.

Well I agree that it could but it requires a radical change in approach, something as radical as turning counter service grocery stores into supermarkets, where enabled by bar codes much of the system is essentially the interaction of suppliers' labels and customers' selections based on need, budget and so forth.

A similar approach in the building industry is more suited to the characteristics of the Internet than a proprietary application understandably tied to its computer aided design drafting (CADD) origins (and of course there is always the uncertainty about owners' intentions).

@alan fraser said:

...some kind of Super-Revit that treats the entire building like some kind of parametised part? Just enter all such requirements into a ginormous spreadsheet and let it rip;

A new approach would be to select from what is available what fits with the design criteria. Only a machine can handle the vast number of identities and data from diverse sources; so that is the first hurdle to overcome before embarking on the more mind expanding criteria element.

@alan fraser said:

... no electrodes necessary.

Yes I read the post again and I apologise for misinterpreting it. (Electrodes somehow seemed to inspire discussion of computers supplementing or augmenting* the human mind)

*extract - All of the features of NLS were in support of Engelbart's goal of augmenting collective knowledge work and therefore focused on making the user more powerful, not simply on making the system easier to use.

@alan fraser said:

Many of the best artistic solutions are the result of 'happy accidents' as we try to imperfectly replicate on paper what's in our heads. In most cases these surpass the original vision.

[aside]This would also make a wonderful quote to epitomise the whole British building industry - all gung-ho and gongs.[/aside]

@alan fraser said:

If all that thought modelling achieves is to save the trouble of moving a mouse or trackball around, then that's even worse.

That's a pretty sad thought. The computer is the closest thing to a brain and the internet the closest to a global brain. And yet its only perceived use in this area is some kind of remote control for an invisible prosthetic hand.

How about this? Many buildings are designed to provide the maximum permissible square feet. Within this, areas are allocated based on square foot allowances per person (including allowances for circulation, toilets or whatever). These allowances are rules of thumb that seem to work (happy accidents) but does anyone really know? What is considered excellent may actually be mediocre.

But if the computer is given access to components like desks, toilet pans and human models, reusable regulations and other restraints, designers can set criteria like: workspaces as big as possible, toilets as small as possible, cost less than 20M Drachma, completion by July 2012. The computer then has its opportunity to compute and display design solutions. Contrary to conventional wisdom automating this part of the design process produces not one-size-fits-all but millions of possibilities that need to be reduced by applying new and resetting existing critieria - which might be called thought modelling.

Movable and interchangeable 3D components are an important part of this kind of idea. So it may be off-the-wall but at least not off-topic - new home new use.

@alan fraser said:

@mike lucey said:

I wonder how far away the day is when designers will just have to attach some electrodes and start 'think modeling' the design?

We'll end up with lots of buildings looking like this.

An interesting part of this is how to convert the think modelling into computer commands to produce models and/or the real thing. Make booby x 2 is not good enough but defining appropriate design criteria might just make think modelling the next big thing. Not quite sure if OT but certainly enough for a tremble.

I just think the "surprise" brings home the risk of relying on free proprietary software always being free - for example, levels of interest in forums, training, books, renderers, plugins ... other unintended consequences of "Do No Evil" perhaps?

@vhiguita said:

Hi,

I am implementing a ruby code that loads me a sketchup file(skp), this is my code:

point = Geom;;Point3d.new 10,20,30
>  transform = Geom;;Transformation.new point
>  model = Sketchup.active_model
>  entities = model.active_entities
>  path = Sketchup.find_support_file "chimney.skp",
>    "C;/Users/usuario/Downloads/pluginsketchUp/Sketchup/org.dworks.suide_1.0.0/exe/"
>  definitions = model.definitions
>  componentdefinition = definitions.load path
>  instance = entities.add_instance componentdefinition, transform
>  if (instance)
>    UI.messagebox instance
>  else
>    UI.messagebox "Failure"
>  end

How could I do, the file loads of a different path to "Components/Components Sampler/" or maybe of a specific url?.

Thanks in advance.

See this topic for similar idea.

(Suggest you use code block as above in your posts.)

@dan rathbun said:

@chrisglasier said:

Do you think it possible to automate the downloads and their extraction into a named folder?

Well the new rbz interface will do this. The "subfolder" must be wrapped inside the zip, and currently will only end up beneath the "plugins" dir. (Google has not yet given us the option to have the extraction go someplace else.)

Thanks but I am not sure I understand how this automates the extraction to the plug in folder. It seems you have to click the install button in extensions?

I was thinking to click a js link in my url (standalone or in wd) to pick up a plain zip file from any trusted url and extract it into one or more named local folders. Dreaming perhaps!

I put skp files into a zip file which I manually download and extract to a subdirectory named in bridge.rb. I can then open each component in its location.

Do you think it possible to automate the downloads and their extraction into a named folder? I have searched but have difficulty getting to grips with the results.

If I could do that then I could demonstrate the benefits of collecting skps and json data from multiple trusted/vetted sources. If required complex js/php analysis of the data to set design criteria for example could be done say in Chrome browser before the url is plopped into the web dialog to see what the various options look like.

Please bear with me!

Thanks T & D.

@thomthom said:

It's your server configuration you need to address. Not your plugin.

Beyond my ken!

Anything like dialog.allow_actions_from_host(url)?

If not what does that do?

Any more help much appreciated!

Thanks

Also ...

@thomthom said:

...

When I type http://glasier.hk/Product/Kitchen.skp into my browser I get a 404. So the problem is that your URLs leads to non-existing resources.

@thomthom said:

How do you trigger the "product" callback?

function suStart(node){
	var fn, params;
	fn = nset[node].Label; //WC in trial
	params = [fn,0,0,0].toString();
	window.location = "skp;product@" + params;
}

@thomthom said:

Made a small test:

First to a non-existsing URL:
model.definitions.load_from_url( 'http://www.thomthom.net/foo.skp' ) Error: #<IOError: (eval):155:inload_from_url': Invalid component URL>
(eval):155
(eval):155`

Then to an existing URL:
model.definitions.load_from_url( 'http://www.thomthom.net/bar.skp' ) #<Sketchup::ComponentDefinition:0xfcdf7bc>

So it looks like your URL is simply wrong. Remember that URL's some times need special characters - for instance spaces are translated to %20 etc.

If the URL fixed? Or is it generated? If it's generated - have you outputted it for inspection? Have you tried the same URL in a browser?

Thanks for doing that.

Have attached bridge.rb.

Will do some more url sleuthing.

bridge.zip

@thomthom said:

Isn't it the URL that's incorrect? A typo or something?

dialog.allow_actions_from_host(url) won't be affecting load_from_url - since they are two unrelated classes.

I don't think it's a typo because I can do it with localhost and the url for the wd is the same online host (glasier.hk) ... but it could be of course "or something".

Couldn't one class block a url so that another cannot use it - or is that muddled thinking?

I have a url sitting in a webdialog. It makes a call to a callback to get a component file from a url. This works testing using localhost/subdir for skp file but not using the subdir in the online url in the webdialog (Of course later I want to use any url to collect definitions).

I thought using dialog.allow_actions_from_host(url) was the obvious solution but I get Error: #<IOError: Invalid component URL>.

Please help me to see what's wrong. Thanks

Google reports over 2,000,000 results in a fraction of a second but ...

it will serve only the first 1,000.

The report is not scientific - there is no proof of quantity nor timing.

Anyone know what it is for?

Joe says to Paddy: "Close your curtains the next time you're making love to your wife. The whole street was watching and laughing at you yesterday."
Paddy says: "Well the joke's on them because I wasn't even at home yesterday."