Welcome to the Onshape forum! Ask questions and join in the discussions about everything Onshape.
First time visiting? Here are some places to start:- Looking for a certain topic? Check out the categories filter or use Search (upper right).
- Need support? Ask a question to our Community Support category.
- Please submit support tickets for bugs but you can request improvements in the Product Feedback category.
- Be respectful, on topic and if you see a problem, Flag it.
If you would like to contact our Community Manager personally, feel free to send a private message or an email.
Options
"Line Point" planes in Onshape
andrew_troup
Member, Mentor Posts: 1,584 ✭✭✭✭✭
It's not clear to me that these serve any purpose in Onshape other than to confuse the user.
If what's wanted is a plane which contains a given line and point, this tool does not provide it.
(What the user should instead ask for is a "Three Point" plane, picking the endpoints of the line as two of the points)
If what's wanted is a plane normal to the endpoint of a given line, (which this tool DOES provide),
that capability is already perfectly well provided by Onshape's "Curve Point" plane tool.
In one of the two examples in Help of a "Curve Point" plane, the curve is actually a straight edge, in other words, a line.
It strikes me that the user would be better served if the "Line Point" plane were simply taken off the menu.
----
Plane creation tools do not seem to me to uphold Onshape's generally high standards for transparency, simplicity and usefulness.
As another example, the "Line Angle" plane is still practically worthless (and the help documentation incorrect), months after its crucial limitations were eviscerated on this forum.
---
NOTE TO ONSHAPE
When I chose "Improvement Requests" as the Category for this post, a message in red advised me I did not have permission to post under this category.
I hope I am not simply given an "insider" explanation of why it is not available, because this would miss the point: the problem is that I should not be offered this choice if it is not available.
If what's wanted is a plane which contains a given line and point, this tool does not provide it.
(What the user should instead ask for is a "Three Point" plane, picking the endpoints of the line as two of the points)
If what's wanted is a plane normal to the endpoint of a given line, (which this tool DOES provide),
that capability is already perfectly well provided by Onshape's "Curve Point" plane tool.
In one of the two examples in Help of a "Curve Point" plane, the curve is actually a straight edge, in other words, a line.
It strikes me that the user would be better served if the "Line Point" plane were simply taken off the menu.
----
Plane creation tools do not seem to me to uphold Onshape's generally high standards for transparency, simplicity and usefulness.
As another example, the "Line Angle" plane is still practically worthless (and the help documentation incorrect), months after its crucial limitations were eviscerated on this forum.
---
NOTE TO ONSHAPE
When I chose "Improvement Requests" as the Category for this post, a message in red advised me I did not have permission to post under this category.
I hope I am not simply given an "insider" explanation of why it is not available, because this would miss the point: the problem is that I should not be offered this choice if it is not available.
1
Comments
The Improvement Requests category is stated to be read-only and comments are welcome. The category is for the improvement voting and discussions (improvements) are only added programmatically from the voting engine. At the top of the category it says:
You've just done exactly what I asked you not to do. I will spell everything out in the hope of getting my point across:
I picked "New Discussion" and wrote a post .
I could not post it without allocating a category, and the way to allocate a category is to pick it from the drop down list.
I was offered a choice including "Improvement Requests"
When I chose that option, I got the red message "You do not have permission to post under this category".
At no stage in this workflow is the user exposed to any of the qualifications and explanations you list in your reply.
In that sense, they are "insider" information. The workflow you refer to has an entirely different entry point, one which the user may not ever have discovered.
I should not be offered this choice if it is not available.
Once you ask a question in a general forum like this I have to assume readers will come in and wonder why it is read only in the first place. I understand what you are requesting but the response was meant for a larger audience.
I have no problem with your responding to a larger audience. Particularly if you would mention that detail in your reply.
I would find it helpful if you would do that in addition to, rather than instead of, responding to me.
What's particularly confusing is that your reply was addressed to me, but (partly because you chose not to read all I wrote), you were not in any meaningful sense replying to me.
You might justifiably infer from the part of my post you didn't read first time through that for me, this miscommunication is, in the immortal words of the great Mr Berra, "deja vu all over again". Miscommunication, in my experience, doesn't save time, but I understand how it can seem to.
As for the forum software, I don't know how it feels to you as an Onshape insider, but to me as an outsider and regular user, I have to say it say it's confusing, frustrating, mercurial and disappointing.
Which means it does not seem to me a good front end for Onshape's brilliant modeler.
I really hope it is not also expensive.