MarkMc

I barely walk with the stuff but trying. In X11 when you go to the object properties macro in the TMM you will see some things listed as Collection, with a bunch of sub things under it. There is an explanation in the user manual about how to get at the stuff in Collections but I haven't been able to make it work as they wrote it. NVP are named value pairs-it's what Chief uses to refer to the attributes that you can get at (also in the reference manual) I would not disagree that it would be great if it were easier but it's not. I have found that even for Chief developers it is not a primary language so they have to work at it. It's there because it is an "accessible" programming language (compared to other prgramming languages) I expect we will see a bit more come baked in when the ML is completed. FWIW the TMM is not really meant for learning-it is what it says, Text Macro Management it's where you write the macros. The Ruby console is a better place to get a feel. The tutorial is a really basic start. After going through that it helps work stuff out. You can select an object in plan and test snippets in the console to see if they work and what the result is if they do. To get anywhere after that you need outside reference- a basic book and a reference of Ruby stuff (technical term for methods, variables, blah blah..) along with a book and a reference (there is a reference linked in the user manual) helps with learning. The reference manual has gotten better with info too this time around. Dealing with that little macro, which is really just a baby step, got me interested in using the ML for that cabinet pricing thing I've been trying to work out. Combined with the addition of custom OIP fields as NVP I am going to try to switch the cabinet pricing thing from schedules to the ML. But I can't get the macros to work there ...yet.

Yes-I'd asked about that and currently CL items are not all available for use as NVP, have to check the object properties macro to see what you can and can't get. Sill working out how to get at "Collections"

Here's one way-cabinet on the right has 4 ROs inserted- each defined as fixture inserts into cabinet-no need to put the drawer glide in the symbol since that doesn't appear to work consistantly. Macro placed in the cabinet comments field-reads the number of inserts, doubles them and outputs a string that reads that number and drawer glides. I would guess that could create problems if you have other inserts but often those cabinets don't. Best I can do on short notice anyway. RO plan with macro.plan

I added inserts, synbol has price and listing in comments "2 drawer glides. As noted 2 of the 4 don't show the comments.

If it's just a full height cabinet, as in plan posted, there are no drawer glides in the CL to edit.

Found it thanks. Didn't help but this did sort of... Changing the ro symbol to inserts into cabinets still allows it to be used as a RO. It will then carry the price and comment (which is where I put the draw glides) BUT inserting 4 rollouts only two list the drawer glides. It doesn't matter if I inert them one at a time or all at once, same result. Plan attached. Maybe someone can get all of them to show the comment? or find another place to put the drawer glides. X11 ro mat list.plan

From what I can tell (with jet lag mind you). Price, comment and other info added to a roll out symbols components does not show in the cabinet ML even though the ROs show. It DOES show under fixture ML with that information. It also appears we've lost the ability to add a sub category to CL in x11. However adding a sub category in X 10, then opening in 11 will carry over. Still makes no difference in the ML though. At least what I can tell quickly and groggy.

That's a PBR not standard. (And most of those are Spot on the left and in cabinet, thing they are point on the right) I can't get standard to work either. I saved a couple of sizes, had some made earlier but these are a tad better. Just figured out for the interiors that I can make one really small, say 1" x .3/4" x 1/4" and still put a bunch of lights in it and offset each- so have 3 ft of lights. X11 makes it really easy.

Think you may be onto something there. Just tested one as a referenced and it works fine.

Figured he had two while taking brother to train. But macro still doesn't show properly any ideas? They all evaluate properly in the TMM

I watched, tried it, don't get the same results. Tested a specific macro to evaluate simple_schedule_number- doesn't give the result you show in mfg field. Still don't get what is up.(no sound on video BTW)

Ran across this yesterday and played at it some this am, still can't figure it out. A very simple macro evaluates to a given number when I look in the TMM but placing that in a field to show in the schedule produces a different result. Why? I tried a few variations without luck. Schedule Number.plan

I went a different way, similar to something I had already made in earlier vesions (I will only very rarely put puck lights in cabinets) Found changing to spot works better. Between the rope light tool and the new convert selected to symbol making a vertical strip is pretty darn quick.

Actually IF I had to I would make only one schedule IN a CAD detail, send it to layout multiple times and crop each one-include the room number in a column for simplicity. Hardest part is making a couple extra headers for each schedule but that could be the layout box label.

That works by room, only one at a time. What the OP wants is the numbers to increase. Personally I just use different letter prefix for each schedule. I've done a lot of quirky things to finnegle schedules-buried stuff in the floor even. If you keep schedules in a CAD detail you could place a number of dummy items (say 1 x 1 x 1.2 ) in the floor to add up to the difference then crop the view in layout. Well if you must - There are a few options-in X11 you may be able to force the issue with referenced plans (new feature) there may be a way to use the room attribute in Ruby (also new and not something I can help with. This can be made to work. here is a simple macro simple_schedule_number.to_i + 52 (discovered on needs to be that plus 1-"simple_schedule_number.to_i + 52 +1") Where "52" is how much you want to increase the start of number by. IOW it adds 12 to the schedule number. THIS will NOT show up in the Number column of the schedule though. I"m attaching a zip with two macros in it. (there is a way to make it work as a single macro for either but I don't remember how and can't find it right now-one of the Rubymeisters may helps with that or something better than this) Back to these macros- one evaluated is as referenced the other is evaluated as owner. (forgot what I named em) you can rename them once imported. Unzip, then in chief-CAD, text, text macro management. When that opens import and find each file (one at a time) Change the numbering to suit your needs. Place the owner macro in an OIP field in each object. If you don't already have one make one up to suit-you will place that in your schedule. You will use that field in the schedule to replace the number field. You can rename it Number_ or something so you know it's yours and not the default Number. For the callouts you place one a callout with a text arrow for each object you want. The arrow MUST connect to the object AND the callout. You will be able to tell if it actually reads something besides evaluation error (my nickname You can however make the arrow invisible once it is connected. Then you can copy and paste the callouts around as needed. In case any Ruby folks are following along-first apologies for simple approach but more imporantly WHY does the macro evaluate to one thing in the TMM (54 in this case) but something else in the schedule? Ref num.zip

I checked, same here in X10 and still in X11. I never noticed since I renumber by dragging the row in the schedule with a plan view open on the side-faster that way.

NO that will send a dwg, no textures For a Chief plan with textures use file, backup entire plan then use the options from there. IF multiple plans and a layout do that from the layout it will then include any plan files. Either will include textures. For sending use the zip option.

Without notes specific to 3D only, preferably to a given camera, it's lost on me. Certainly don't care to have those inserted into plan view ghostly in.

To copy have a schedule that uses them and set it as default, then import defaults, select schedule in question, will import the fields.

I agree it's less than ideal at the moment. It appears that newly added items, added in X11, keep the information IF something is already filled out in the field. Items brought forward don't appear to (but they might, have to check some more) and if the OIP field is empty it doesn't show up.

Don't know if it's a bug or a feature or something that was missed. Solution is to import schedule defaults from old plan. That is assuming you have a default schedule for an object that has the fields you want. Should really be an option to have it stick or to import the fields themselves since they are a default. They should also stick in the library which they do not even after importing the fields. I'm going to have a bit more play with it before sending it in.

Yes I saw the inserts, haven't figured out if that helps or not since not. Tested adding some mods that are not really and insert to see if I can use that. OTOH having custom OIP fields available makes my day. It means I have to start over on the project I 'm working (cabinet price from CSV) but I don't mind at all since it will streamline the whole thing.

As to light output and such- may want to see about using spots instead of point lights. There are situations with some cabinet hacks where spots work better. If you need these in a schedule correctly and order these by sizes (I use Hafele) having them in library is handy.

There are over 20,000 posts in the suggestion forum. I know that mine are really more important but not everyone feels that way. I kind of like Larry's approach-high hopes, limited expectations. I don't check to see if they did any of mine (there's one I've sent in every year that, well, if it happens I may fall over dead) Instead I just do the Bubba Gump thing and see what sweets are in the box. This version may give me a diabetic overdose. :)

Sorry I misunderstood, thought you were changing the box