Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Remove the Reference property in the common property sets #83

Open
Moult opened this issue Feb 1, 2021 · 0 comments
Open

Remove the Reference property in the common property sets #83

Moult opened this issue Feb 1, 2021 · 0 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@Moult
Copy link

Moult commented Feb 1, 2021

Description of the proposal:

Not exactly affecting the schema, but does affect Pset definition templates, and definitely affects the users experience as it removes an important ambiguity that I've seen come up again and again. Basically the defined by type Name attribute and the Pset_*Common.Reference is a duplicate, seemingly as a fallback for software that doesn't implement IFC types. I propose to remove the duplication and stick to Name, which is the natural identification field people look for and has always been recommended in the past.

More info: https://forums.buildingsmart.org/t/how-do-you-store-element-codes-in-ifc/884
More more info: https://standards.buildingsmart.org/documents/Implementation/IFC_Implementation_Agreements/CV-2x3-136.html

Describe how it contributes to the objectives (https://github.com/buildingSMART/NextGen-IFC/wiki/Towards-a-technology-independent-IFC):

Less complexity, as there is a clear rule of where data should be stored

Is this a proposal to 'add', 'remove' of 'change' entities in the schema (pick one):

Remove

What do we win:

Less complexity

What do we lose

Compatibility with software that doesn't support type relationships

Schema impact:

Pset definition template removed

Instance model impact: ?

Backwards compatible:

Yes

Automatic migration possible:

Yes

Additional implications:

Note that not all points need to be satisfied!
Backwards compatibility and file size are not concerns.

@Moult Moult added the enhancement New feature or request label Feb 1, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant