Hi! Eric wrote: > Yes. It is as much about the entrenched assets as anything. People > will entertain the idea of changing workflows, but if you can't at > least *read* their existing files from the start, they have to learn to > use your drawing tool and build-up a drawing from a blank page before > getting any sort of feel of whether it would work for them. Being able > to open some .dwg files means you can use your existing templates and > generally explore a new tool (even if you have to export .dxf from the > open source program to feed back into your workflow.) > I did not want to propose that people should not have a way to move their data from propietary formats into open ones. I just think that the problem of commercial cad systems not to be able to save in vendor-independent formats should not burden open source cad solutions. As long as open source cad can read and write open standards, they are perfectly functional. The missing interface to the open standards is not in the open cads, but in the propietary ones. So I think that the interface should be provided either as a convertor software, or even as a plug-in like module for the commercial cad. Having one programmer who is using Autocad and following the changes in releases, formats and interfaces to write an export-plugin is ways easier then having every open source cad keeping on developer busy tracking the changes in Autocad. And, again, the user experience counts here. The problem is located in the propietary cad, the solution should be there, too, and problems arising should be clearly identifyable as e.g. a problem when exporting from Autocad to iges, but not in importing into an open cad app that understands iges perfectly and just did not follow the latest change in dwg. Cheers, Lars.