IfcSpatialElement Attribute LongName

BIMFRONT

@konrad No, that is incorrect.

BIMFRONT

Is that to much to ask for? That Solibri show all attributes in the IFC standard?

And for not to mention that some attributes get new names.
IfcSite.LandTitleNumber = Number
IfcSpace.LongName = Name
IfcSpace.Name = Number

Solibri. PLEASE.
Solibri is a tool for model checking. Show the IFC file as it is!

lasse.lindqvist

Hi. The situation is because of historical reasons. It could be changed of course, I agree with that.

joaeie

Agree with @BIMfront, that would be so much helpful!

Show the IFC file as it is - go transparency!

dago

Fully agree!

Should this be added as a feature request also?

BIMFRONT

@lasse-lindqvist Good to hear that you agree. There seem to be many others here who agree as well.
Do I need to make it a future request, or can you take it from here and make it a reality?
You say “it could be changed”, but will Solibri do it in the near future?

lasse.lindqvist

@bimfront said in IfcSpatialElement Attribute LongName:

@lasse-lindqvist Good to hear that you agree. There seem to be many others here who agree as well.
Do I need to make it a future request, or can you take it from here and make it a reality?
You say “it could be changed”, but will Solibri do it in the near future?

I cannot personally decide or promise that.
Solibri Society feature requests or bug reports are prioritized based on impact and demand, so people voting for the post helps get it picked up for future versions.

This post currently has 11 votes, which already is quite many.

Kenneth Krogseth

Fully agree on this!

In Norway we have a lot of requirements on the IFC format. Solibri is an important tool for checking this requirements. It`s not easy to check the IFC contents, when some of the contents are translated to “Solibrisk”.

Yassir Fayyaz C3

@lasse-lindqvist @BIMFRONT
Hi, I totally agree on this post.
But what I struggle to understand, is how a software vendor that completely relies on an ISO standard file format, must base their support of the format, on impact and demand (Seriously?). When you’re made aware by your expert users that your software is handling the ISO standard file format in a faulty matter, you should, in my opinion, listen to that and correct how the software is handling IFC information.

Solibri is a software certified by buildingSmart when it comes to Import of IFC 2X3 but based on this post and what we’re able to extract from the software, I’m not sure that I fully agree with buildingSmart. When direct attributes are presented different than in the Standard, you are moving outside of the rules of the Standard.
I’ve used Solibri since 2012, so I’m fully aware of these contradictions in the software, we’ve learned to “live with it”, but new users get confused when they have to learn that “what Solibri says, is not always the right answer”.

That said, I believe that through continuous improvements and listening to users like BIMFRONT, is the way to go. I hope that in the future, we can check raw IFC data without any need for translating Solibri data

PS! This is not personal, strictly business

BIMFRONT

ok, this topic is 6 months old, and we are still waiting for this to happen.
I can not belive this is a topic. It should not be necessary to ask Solibri if they could please show all the information available in the IFC file.
This is not an issue in other Ifc viewers, so this cant be that hard to fix?