The last part of the animation looks like a map of world obesity

@chrisglasier said: So if you don't mind I'll delete the files in this topic to save face! I don't mind and I am looking forward to the new device.

That's very kind Gaieus. I have sent account details and file to your gmail address. Toodle pip! Chris

I believe that it is not set up yet for the authors to be able to edit their info unfortunately. Hopefully in time that will get up and running. Chris

[

Thanks all. I need to rethink this before asking people to venture further down a blind alley. I can reduce a Sketchup up model to two plain text lists. One lists components and groups and the other lists scenes. Both lists are turned into javascript multi-level arrays. But I don't want to wipe out any established relationships between components and layers, layers and scenes, scenes and styles and scenes and property settings. I thought I could do that by manipulating the model but I am thinking it is probably better to capture the data and regenerate the whole thing. If you are interested in why I want to do this please see the discussion in the Modelur thread. Thanks and regards Chris

Oh good, that is a much better way of doing it! Chris

@xrok1 said: Maybe if you change the name you'll get more response. hmmm... what about Outganizer Yes thanks I'm open to all suggestions. Perhaps a name that captures the idea of nesting sets of scenes and components as shown in this "Reform" part of the machine? Don't think Outganiser does that really. [image: L1s8_Previewreformversion2.png]

Sorry Chris, I would love to help. I have never used web dialogs - however!, I have bought me a nice Javascript book and I am going through it. I only in chapter 2, so I have not got to the point where I can do anything, but maybe in a few days or weeks I'll know better how to get SU and JS to talk freely back and forth. I can say that I don't like JS nearly as much as Ruby though. Chris

@dave r said: Does this answer your question? I haven't used it but it's on my list. That's great. I need to talk to Rick somehow as there is a new version in hand. The reason I asked the question (in case you are interested) arose from a conversation with Red, viz: I think we should stop calling it a document. It is a machine like an ATM that does work people exclusively used to do. Because cgScenes interface moves I don't think it is difficult to see it as a machine but there will be trouble if you describe a cgScene-energised Sketchup model a machine. But it is; it will provide graphical answers for an owner, architect, engineer, local authority, buyer, logistics person, crane driver, brickie, hotel operator, maintenance man, cleaner ... More than this any of them can make their own scenes from the same model in the format that suits them best. Maybe some people in similar competences make suitable devices and styles to be used by their colleagues. Ah but supposing they alter the model. Well, there should be only one model kept by its owner; what gets passed around are the saved scenes with notes (e.g. in the Scene description box). Additions or amendments by authorised persons is slightly different but equally simple. Do you have it on your list for a similar reason? I'd be very interested to hear Chris

I can actually make a JavaScript alert like "Hello World" (Now let's not take this thread OT)

Thanks TBD, so your temp folder is called "TMPDIR"

@dave r said: Trapping a click on a component could be good. That happens with the Outliner. But, in the outliner, you can also click on the component in the list and have it highlighted in the model. Please see this topic for update. Highlighting is now essentially bi functional. Thanks for bringing this up - very useful feedback. Chris

@unknownuser said: ... 2-3 minutes max for the whole lot ... Thanks Howard - very considerate Chris

@juju said: I see the last version update, as per the pluginstore, was 2013-04-29. Is this tool 2015 compatible? bump

@chrisglasier said: I'll get back on it tomorrow. In the meantime thanks for your help. Chris Here's the result: # Lists components and groups (with hidden status) in a scene @dlg.add_action_callback("findComponents") {|d, p| model = Sketchup.active_model entities = model.active_entities a = 0 array = [] entities.each do |entity| if entity.class == Sketchup;;Group || entity.class == Sketchup;;ComponentInstance if entity.layer.visible? array[a] = [] if entity.class == Sketchup;;ComponentInstance array[a][0] = entity.definition.name end if entity.class == Sketchup;;Group array[a][0] = entity.name end array[a][1] = entity.hidden? array[a] = array[a].join(",") a+=1 end #if class end # if visible end #loop array = array.join(";") cmd = "receiveComponents('#{array}');" @dlg.execute_script (cmd) } [image: jrTi_screenMachine04.jpg] Tally ho! Chris

@chrisglasier said: I feel quite despondent that I continue to fail to explain namesets adequately but I will soldier on with a good old British stiff upper lip! Chris A couple of members told me privately that taking a look at "Operative content" helped. Thanks ... Chris

@gaieus said: Imagine a case like you send a file (with certain style AND preferences settings) to someone and your file overwrites his preferences (paths to component folders, shortcuts, image editor etc.). Yes now I know what I wanted to say before sleepiness overcame me. Please refer to this thread about exporting scenes. Here I changed TIG's destination File.dirname(model.path) (same as Rick W's I think) to a fixed directory. I knew this was not the final solution but please consider this: I want to send Nero a set of models for him to build from. I want to give him the opportunity to have "working" images something like this: [image: f259_Shortsectionliving.jpg] (the sort of sketches we often make to interpret/understand/filter orthogonal working drawings - cut out the middle man eh!). So I can make a lot of scenes for him or he can make his own if my plans for a scene controller work out. But he won't thank me if all 100 or 200 jpg files (as well-named as they would be) add to what would become the great bulk of his model folder. I could though ask him via the web dialog for his project preferences files and use some script (?) to pick them up for the export. I guess some similar arrangement should be made to share styles, materials, scenes (via js controller records) and so on. On the otherhand perhaps I should just go back to bed. Chris

@rickw said: SceneExporter and SceneExporterPro will do this as well. Very thoughtful and generous, thanks. You may be interested in seeing how this relates to my templates query Chris

@chrisglasier said: @tig said: You need to make two similar styles - one with and one without the sections ticked - make sure the correct styles are applied to the required scenes... Should then work as expected... Thanks for speedy reply. I didn't know section planes had anything to do with styles; I will investigate that. Any further illumination would be good as I can be quite thick sometimes! Thanks Chris OK found it!