I haven't used a new version of AutoCAD for some time but historically solid objects where defined as encoded strings within the DXF export file, rendering it only partially 'open'. Not sure if this situation has changed but it may be a challenge to support all current AutoCAD entity types.

Has anybody explored the cost of using the libraries from the Open Design Alliance?
(http://www.opendesign.com/)

Jim,
Which DXF entity types do you aim to support eventually?

In basic terms this article may be helpful to explain the principle:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/265879/can-ruby-import-a-net-dll

If you use IronRuby you may be able to write the XML parser .NET class by leveraging your curent ruby skills.
(You will need to do some homework to confirm that you could make the IronRuby .NET class com-visible though.)
Alternatively if you know java you could use J#.NET.

Having explored a few options in the past I settled on writing a .DLL in .NET that uses the powerful XML query functionality of LINQ to to do the data crunching. By doing this you could call a simple function through COM to retrieve/update specific node and attribute values from SU Ruby. If you do not have knowledge of any of the main .NET languages you could possibly explore using IronRuby for this purpose.

By posting here you have been automatically added to the Google Cloud Ban. That means you won't qualify for the smaller compact version of their brain implanted automated search chip when it is released.

Now at least I can sell those unused copies of AutoCAD.
http://www.out-law.com/default.aspx?page=10421
.

I think that the missing elements from PR rendering is license and interpretation. When you look at some of the architectural illustrations done 30-40 years ago it was more about expresion of mood and capturing the essence of the design rather than the accurate rendition of the building in terms of form and materials. The loose watercolour impressions also allowed individual interpretation by the viewer almost like Rorschach inkblot tests generates ranging responses to the same image when viewed by different poeple.

I do not think that it is a question of NPR or PR but rather what is appropriate at what stage of the design process. When the design has been developed to a certain level rendered images have real value in terms of testing the design prototype in terms final configuration.
It is a shame however that hand sketches and architectural illustration has become somewhat of a lost art during the early design stages.

Which render plugin did you use?

Modelhead,
Whether you use the technology to crack the code of an application or to hack into a remote computer, both actions are illegal if not criminal. You cannot condemn the one act and justify the other.

The suggestion that the police would publicly authorize hacking into a remote system for the purpose of disrupting it is ridiculous. If they are then they themselves are breaking the law. The implication that your mate could be hired to disrupt the networks of the sites in question is entirely out of order.

This forum is not made up of cyber-vigilantes that would employ illegitimate means to adminiser vengeance on anybody that dares to crack a plugin. I think you are overinfatuated with the idea that these individuals have the power to trace any individual anywhere and wreak havoc with impunity. I also think your obvious close association and support of somebody who by your own account makes himself guilty of such an action only brings your own values into question.

@unknownuser said:

I can't describe the mess he made cause it was a bit over my head but the computers he was able to reach could not be recovered via restore. He would also leave them a gift somewhere hidden in their network (in Grannies Word files) that would fire up on a set schedule and continue, masking itself as a network connection scanning for an entry point. Thinking it was an external attack most would never find the gremlin for a few months. In the mean time they had to have a full time guy recovering computers until they found it.

Modelhead,
I think you will find that there are less than three hundred poeple on the earth who would believe that the police would authorise or condone this type of activity. Hopefuly you are not one of them.

@unknownuser said:

Messing up other peoples computers pays well if you do it legally

I do not believe it is legal to acccess any computer of any organisation/person with the intent to alter or interfere with the system. Doing this is no better than what these blokes are doing by nicking the software.

Shame on you for propagating the notion that such practice is justified.

I'm taking guess but if your models are generated by a modeller that uses solids these entities may require translation into meshed equivalents which could be producing the additional size/elements.

Which instrument is the best : A sax or a trumpet?
The best choice is the one that you like and can/will master as a tool.

I suspect your issue may be caused by the following:

Because some of the smaller faces weld to the edges of the larger rectangles it creates additional edge vertexes. The SU geometry engine then no longer sees the large faces as rectangles (4 vertexes) but as multi-vertex polygons which requires a less efficient triangulation of triangles with collinear edges. It would add a lot of overhead for the algorithm to check if a multi-vertex (more than 4) polygon has the shape of a rectangle prior to to calculating triangulation so it employs a generic triangulation for a polygon with any number of sides and of any shape.

You could possibly solve the problem by creating a ruby processor that will iterate through the planar face entities and checks for collinear edges in polygons with more than 4 vertexes. If such a condition is found the processor should create a new face inside a group (to avoid welding with other edges), with only the vertexes that define the shape, (eliminate all collinear vertexes) and then delete the original multi-vertex face.

Theoretically this should solve your problem as the SU exporter will then triangulate between only the desired vertexes.

Generaly the definition would imply that entities that provide parametric support would allow you to manipulate them (as an alternative and complimetary to direct manual editing) by changing parameter values after the entities have been created. In the CAD context this may apply to simple entities like lines and arcs too in those applications that support it. You will generally find this feature in CAD apps that historicaly have a mechanical/product design bias.

http://www2.sandbox.google.com/
Is it just me or is it faster?

For anyone looking for a high end (parametric) CAD system to run alongside Sketchup at an affordable price. (For a while anway...)
http://www.tenlinks.com/news/PR/alibre/081109_99_dollar.htm

One thing I have learnt the hard way is that the best policy is to upgrade OS, software and hardware at the same time so that all the elements are from the same generation of technology development. In IT terms even a few months is a long time and forward and backward compatibility holds no guarantees which often leads to expensive downtime in trying to get things to work.

I guess I'm sticking to XP while my Dell holds out.

Windows 7: Four reasons to upgrade, four reasons to stay away:
http://infoworld.com/print/86152

Microsoft enters the search engine wars:
http://www.bing.com
http://www.discoverbing.co.uk/
.

For those that haven't seen these:
http://homepage.mac.com/imagefiction/AIP24SelectedWorks/index.html
.