| 01:48.05 | brlcad | that is quite a treasure trove .. don't recall seeing some of those documents |
| 01:48.17 | brlcad | starseeker: http://brlcad.org/~sean/private/SCL/ftp.nd.rl.ac.uk/pub/data_formats/NIST-software/DProbe3.0/data/dis203/ap203.exp |
| 01:49.41 | brlcad | the SCL tool docs (ps files) in there look particularly relevant for stepcode |
| 01:54.24 | starseeker | if it was done as part of the original NIST effort by a government employee, it's something we could incorporate into stepcode |
| 01:55.12 | starseeker | ah, crud |
| 01:55.18 | starseeker | nevermind, I see the readme now |
| 01:59.53 | brlcad | still a great ref |
| 02:00.10 | brlcad | hmm, looks like I did have that doc stashed away .. but not those ps files |
| 02:01.10 | starseeker | brlcad: does this have the diagrams you were thinking of? http://www.steptools.com/support/stdev_docs/express/ap203/recprac203v8.pdf |
| 02:01.43 | starseeker | looks like it might be quite helpful... |
| 02:02.20 | brlcad | YEP! |
| 02:02.25 | brlcad | that's the one, damn |
| 02:02.30 | brlcad | stashes |
| 02:03.25 | brlcad | wonders if that's the evolution of ap203.exp |
| 02:04.05 | starseeker | helpful, but also confirms how friggin weird these constructs are... |
| 02:05.04 | starseeker | will read that tomorrow, probably the most helpful looking thing I've seen so far |
| 02:06.13 | starseeker | humph - physical file examples and everything |
| 02:11.01 | brlcad | probably worth spending the entire day just digesting that in detail |
| 02:12.00 | brlcad | suggests printing up a copy, grabbing a drink, and finding a cozy spot outside friday to snuggle up with it |
| 02:13.21 | starseeker | bugger - no wonder the files all seem to have the security classification stuff in them - AP203 *requires* assembly_component_usages be associated with one |
| 02:14.45 | starseeker | brlcad: if I'm reading the disclamer in that document correctly, they're deliberately not copying it to allow for the free exchange of the information |
| 02:15.17 | starseeker | in which case, this should probably be front and center in the stepcode documentation collection |
| 02:16.59 | starseeker | mpictor: are you familiar with the recprac203v8.pdf document? |
| 02:20.13 | starseeker | er, deliberately not *copyrighting* it, not copying... gah |
| 02:29.32 | brlcad | starseeker: sure, perhaps, but someone should read it in full too ;) |
| 02:29.43 | brlcad | someone writing an importer or exporter even |
| 02:45.36 | starseeker | brlcad: oh, I plan to :-) |
| 02:48.04 | starseeker | it's the guy in the maze who is happiest to find a map |
| 02:48.47 | starseeker | even if it does probably mean implementing another three dozen boilerplate object insertions... |
| 02:58.00 | starseeker | brlcad: sorry, I didn't see you had linked that same recprac203v8 in the #brlcad channel (with even the same note on its helpfulness) |
| 02:58.03 | starseeker | gah |
| 02:58.51 | starseeker | needs to find his brain and plug it back in... |
| 10:44.41 | mpictor | finally figured out how to scroll in irssi - far easier than I expected :/ |
| 10:45.07 | mpictor | starseeker: no, I haven't read any of the recpracs |
| 10:45.51 | mpictor | Charlie pointed me to one or more of them at one point, but I never had the time to read them |
| 10:48.00 | mpictor | regarding the readme.txt associated with that express file, I think it no longer applies - they allow for free redistribution of the express schemas now |
| 10:49.21 | mpictor | brlcad: I looked at some of the docs and got the impression that they were older than the docs we already have |
| 10:49.33 | brlcad | except I couldn't find a copy of that annotated schema anywhere (else) -- just that official doc |
| 10:49.40 | mpictor | oh |
| 10:49.41 | brlcad | could be |
| 10:50.09 | mpictor | < brlcad> the SCL tool docs (ps files) in there look particularly relevant for stepcode |
| 10:50.21 | brlcad | yeah, those I hadn't seen before |
| 10:50.30 | brlcad | or at least don't remember |
| 10:50.48 | mpictor | guess I need to compare them with what's in the doc/ dir |
| 10:51.59 | brlcad | could have all evolved into SCL some place |
| 10:52.10 | brlcad | just seems like .. more :) |
| 10:53.09 | brlcad | especially some of the stuff not in the docs/ directory |
| 10:53.34 | brlcad | but that too |
| 10:55.25 | mpictor | p21tk is the precursor to cleditor - I remember seeing a doc that mentioned the first version using a lexer/parser |
| 10:55.45 | mpictor | so we have the files if anyone ever wants to go that route |
| 10:57.19 | mpictor | and one doc mentioned a GUI tool that allowed one to edit EXPRESS, then switch to a mode for creating .p21 files to match it |
| 10:57.47 | mpictor | of course, it probably used InterViews |
| 11:38.51 | mpictor | in the past, RECPRACs were published by cax-if after a new schema was finalized |
| 11:39.23 | mpictor | someone (Tom Thurman?) told me that in the future they will be developed in parallel with the schemas |
| 11:40.19 | mpictor | less chance of mistakes that way, the people writing the schemas will be able to provide better input, etc |
| 11:58.02 | starseeker | mpictor: I looked elsewhere for that annotated schema too, and also came up empty. We'd have to track down its actual origins and status somehow, if that's even possible at this late date |
| 11:59.04 | starseeker | I'll be reading it much more thoroughly, but right now it's looking like the recprac203v8 document is the one that will actually make (quasi) sense out of ap203 from a practical standpoint |
| 11:59.29 | mpictor | yea |
| 13:34.35 | mpictor | sudo make me a sandwich! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uqj4aRfOjXI |
| 13:45.46 | *** join/#stepcode starseek1r (~starseeke@66-118-151-70.static.sagonet.net) |
| 14:41.25 | *** join/#stepcode kesha (~kesha@14.139.122.114) |
| 15:17.28 | *** join/#stepcode kesha (~kesha@14.139.122.114) |
| 15:22.05 | mpictor | starseeker: any idea how to fix an error in a postscript file? part1.ps.gz from that site is a draft of 10303-1 |
| 15:22.17 | mpictor | since it's a draft, it isn't copyrighted |
| 15:22.51 | mpictor | since it's a *committee draft* it isn't (C) |
| 16:09.59 | *** join/#stepcode colomon (~colomon@97-95-33-142.dhcp.bycy.mi.charter.com) |
| 16:10.46 | colomon | mpictor++ |
| 16:11.25 | mpictor | hi colomon |
| 16:11.29 | colomon | hello |
| 16:11.34 | colomon | do you have a second to chat? |
| 16:11.46 | mpictor | sure |
| 16:12.43 | mpictor | are you Solomon Foster who just emailed scl-dev? |
| 16:13.37 | colomon | I'm looking for something that can do local STEP conformance checking, like http://www.steptools.com/translate/ but local and for more modern schemas. Is that something that STEPcode can do now, with appropriate wrapper? Or would it be major new functionality for it? |
| 16:13.43 | colomon | yes, I'm Solomon. |
| 16:14.44 | mpictor | oh, you want to verify that a Part 21 file matches the schema? |
| 16:15.00 | mpictor | STEPcode can do that, but it isn't 100% bug free |
| 16:15.28 | colomon | that's awesome. |
| 16:15.46 | colomon | considering that my first plan this morning was to implement that functionality from scratch. :) |
| 16:16.14 | mpictor | build STEPcode with whatever schema you need (if you got the error about the merged schema, then you've build all we have) and then use the p21read binary |
| 16:16.24 | mpictor | *built |
| 16:16.43 | colomon | and that will report errors? |
| 16:16.57 | mpictor | i.e. bin/p21read_sdai_APnnn file.p21 |
| 16:16.58 | mpictor | yes |
| 16:17.02 | colomon | well, non-conforming bits. |
| 16:17.05 | colomon | that's terrific. |
| 16:17.18 | colomon | any hints for where I should expect bugs? |
| 16:17.39 | mpictor | like I said, it's not 100%... I think it's less likely to miss problems than it is to report things that aren't problems |
| 16:17.45 | mpictor | not really |
| 16:18.04 | mpictor | complex instances maybe |
| 16:19.18 | mpictor | there is one error that was so common that I made it a warning |
| 16:19.39 | mpictor | STEPTools likes to write files where the name attribute is *, instead of '' |
| 16:19.47 | mpictor | s/files/instances/ |
| 16:20.02 | mpictor | hi infobot |
| 16:20.07 | colomon | infobot++ |
| 16:20.37 | colomon | is trying this out with AP203 at the moment. |
| 16:21.56 | mpictor | hrm. just remembered... there are some ap210 files that sc doesn't like, and we aren't sure whether the problem is on our end or not |
| 16:22.36 | *** join/#stepcode travis-ci (~travis-ci@ec2-107-20-85-28.compute-1.amazonaws.com) |
| 16:22.36 | travis-ci | [travis-ci] stepcode/stepcode#58 (master - 335ccf9 : Mark Pictor): The build is still failing. |
| 16:22.36 | travis-ci | [travis-ci] Change view : https://github.com/stepcode/stepcode/compare/e1f0a6a7ee77...335ccf97120f |
| 16:22.36 | travis-ci | [travis-ci] Build details : http://travis-ci.org/stepcode/stepcode/builds/11600005 |
| 16:22.36 | *** part/#stepcode travis-ci (~travis-ci@ec2-107-20-85-28.compute-1.amazonaws.com) |
| 16:23.07 | colomon | I'm trying as1-id-203.stp (which I assume is pretty standard) using bin/p21read_sdai_ap203. It's giving me 48 errors, things like |
| 16:23.08 | colomon | ERROR: instance #2355 'DERIVED_UNIT_ELEMENT': Unknown ENTITY type. |
| 16:23.09 | colomon | Data lost: (#2354,3.0) |
| 16:23.46 | colomon | I've always assumed this file was correct... |
| 16:23.52 | mpictor | we deleted a bunch of cax-if files after discovering that they conformed to draft schemas :( |
| 16:24.26 | colomon | I noticed the web page seems to have new versions of the files. Interesting. |
| 16:25.27 | colomon | I've got to run at the moment, but thank you. This is a great start for me. |
| 16:26.57 | mpictor | colomon: glad I could help |
| 16:51.26 | *** join/#stepcode travis-ci (~travis-ci@ec2-23-23-31-73.compute-1.amazonaws.com) |
| 16:51.26 | travis-ci | [travis-ci] stepcode/stepcode#59 (master - 3042d90 : Mark): The build is still failing. |
| 16:51.26 | travis-ci | [travis-ci] Change view : https://github.com/stepcode/stepcode/compare/335ccf97120f...3042d902b2e8 |
| 16:51.27 | travis-ci | [travis-ci] Build details : http://travis-ci.org/stepcode/stepcode/builds/11601217 |
| 16:51.27 | *** part/#stepcode travis-ci (~travis-ci@ec2-23-23-31-73.compute-1.amazonaws.com) |
| 17:30.28 | brlcad | starseeker: or e-mail that guy that says he controls it and ask if it can be re-released |
| 17:32.36 | brlcad | colomon: cool effort on your part, interested in hearing what you get working if/when you do |
| 17:34.09 | colomon | I will report back. :) |
| 17:35.46 | brlcad | it's gone both ways, stepcode has been able to uncover bugs in the schemas as well as of course being a challenge to implement all the complex ways entities can express relationships |
| 18:25.08 | mpictor | fixed part1.ps - turns out its line endings were rrn, and there was an extra line at the end |
| 18:27.20 | mpictor | extra line of gibberish, that is |
| 18:34.15 | *** join/#stepcode kesha (~kesha@14.139.122.114) |
| 18:40.38 | colomon | Interesting. I've tried the two newer AP203 versions of as1 from http://www.cax-if.org/library/index.html, and they both still generate errors in p21read, no matter whether I use 203 or 203e2. And I'm pretty sure stepcode is correct about them. |
| 18:45.03 | brlcad | colomon: did you see stepcode's fixed ap203? |
| 18:45.28 | colomon | um… no? fixed how? |
| 18:45.48 | brlcad | comments are in the schema header as a comment |
| 18:45.59 | brlcad | look in the data/ap203 directory |
| 18:46.31 | colomon | got it |
| 18:47.02 | brlcad | ap203e2 is also there, don't remember if it's been modified the same way |
| 18:47.07 | brlcad | don't think it has |
| 18:47.15 | colomon | There's no comment about it, at any rate. |
| 18:58.40 | kesha | brlcad: ping |
| 19:14.46 | *** join/#stepcode kesha (~kesha@14.139.122.114) |
| 19:20.23 | mpictor | colomon: no, just ap203 |
| 19:21.49 | mpictor | is trying to add support for inverse qualified attributes to the parser so Tom Thurman can pretty print his new schemas |
| 19:27.03 | mpictor | colomon: I've been told that CAX-IF has newer, conformant files available to members |
| 19:27.52 | mpictor | iirc, stepcode is in a grey area and doesn't qualify for membership |
| 19:48.48 | colomon | mpictor: why wouldn't they want everyone to have access to correct sample files? What's the downside? |
| 19:52.21 | mpictor | they think that the vendors won't be as open if their files can be disparaged publicly |
| 20:24.49 | colomon | I can understand that, I guess. |
| 20:25.46 | colomon | suppresses a rant |
| 20:27.38 | mpictor | lol yea |
| 20:30.16 | mpictor | colomon: If you don't mind me asking, what are you working on? |
| 20:31.35 | colomon | I am trying to update my STEP preprocessor to correctly output AP203, AP214, and AP242 files. |
| 20:32.10 | colomon | and I'd really love to have a conformance tester that I could routinely use in my testing code. |
| 20:32.32 | mpictor | I see |
| 20:32.55 | mpictor | ...and what would this preprocessor be attached to? :) |
| 20:33.11 | colomon | whatever one of my customers attaches it to. :) |
| 20:33.16 | mpictor | I see |
| 20:33.52 | mpictor | I assumed you worked for a CAD company or something. Sounds like they buy from you, instead |
| 20:34.01 | colomon | Yes, exactly. |
| 20:34.38 | colomon | I've been at this for a long time now. Reading STEP files is more a matter of making the files you have work, not standards conformance. |
| 20:35.10 | mpictor | can we convince you to use STEPcode for import/export? Then we'll have someone else fixing bugs :D |
| 20:35.13 | mpictor | yea |
| 20:35.40 | colomon | Writing files, I've gotten by writing out a sort of pidgin AP203 file with bits of AP214 in it. (Which actually may be pretty close to what AP203e2 actually has, now that I've looked at it a bit.) |
| 20:35.58 | colomon | But now I've got a customer willing to pay me to actually write proper AP203, AP214, and AP242 fies. |
| 20:36.03 | colomon | So I need to figure out what is required. |
| 20:36.07 | mpictor | I see |
| 20:36.32 | colomon | I've got AP214 working (more or less) according to the STEPTools online checker. |
| 20:36.40 | colomon | but that doesn't help at all for AP203e2 or AP242. |
| 20:36.44 | mpictor | yea |
| 20:37.07 | colomon | I won't be using stepcode in my software directly any time soon (probably ever) |
| 20:37.25 | colomon | But if I can use it to test my software, I'm more than happy to work on fixing bugs I encounter. |
| 20:37.28 | mpictor | I hope that people move away from ap203 and 214 fairly quickly once 242 is released, so that people only have to deal with a single format |
| 20:37.42 | mpictor | that works for me :) |
| 20:38.04 | colomon | mpictor: My career experience has made me cynical about fixing standard problems by adding a new standard. :) |
| 20:39.33 | mpictor | I see it more as a refinement |
| 20:40.54 | mpictor | that said, old files will remain around forever, so support for ap203/214 will remain important even if nobody creates new files in those formats |
| 21:06.16 | *** join/#stepcode mpictor (~mark@c-67-177-102-131.hsd1.in.comcast.net) |
| 21:11.42 | mpictor | colomon: Express Engine can also verify a p21 file against a schema, IIRC. |
| 21:11.57 | mpictor | a link to that, as well as other things that might interest you, can be found at http://stepcode.org/mw/index.php?title=List_of_OSS_or_free_STEP_programs#Other_Free_Software_for_STEP |
| 21:21.45 | colomon | mpictor++ |
| 21:37.21 | *** join/#stepcode kesha (~kesha@14.139.122.114) |
| 21:51.44 | *** join/#stepcode colomon (~colomon@97-95-33-142.dhcp.bycy.mi.charter.com) |