War nur eben Praktisch und einfach

Nein, etwas den Arbeitsweg angepasst und gut ist. Man muss mit dem Programm arbeiten und es verstehen, dann lernt man es zu schätzen und zu nutzen

Ja ich bin echt auf die nächsten Versionen gespannt. Lesen schon immer etwas mit im Forum. Besonders auf das Klemmenplanmodul.

Translator:

Servus

It was just practical and simple

No, something adapted the way to work and is good. You have to work with the program and understand it, then you learn to appreciate and use it

Yes, I'm really looking forward to the next versions. Always read something in the forum. Especially on the terminal diagram module.

als Problem würde ich das auch nicht ansehen:
Für eine saubere Trennung von Schaltplan und Aufbaubild braucht ihr sowieso jeweils eigene Schaltplan-Symbole für die KNX-Module, weil die Aufbaubilder bekannterweise keine Anschlüsse haben....

Für die Verknüpfung von Schaltplansymbol und Front-Ansicht hat Joshua ja schon für eine spätere Version von QET eine Lösung in Aussicht gestellt. Und für die Aufteilung eines komplexeren Gerätes in mehrere Schaltplansymbole gibt es auch bereits Feature-Wishes in anderen Threads hier im Forum.

via Online-Translator:
I wouldn't consider that a problem either:
For a clean separation of the schematic and the front view, you need separate schematic symbols for the KNX modules anyway, because the front views do not have any terminals...

Joshua has already promised a solution for linking the schematic symbol and the front view in a later version of QET. And for the division of complex devicee into more than one schematic symbols, there are already feature wishes in other threads here in the forum.

Die Grundlegende Idee finde ich soweit gut.
Nur ein Problem ist, wir nutzen die Symbole auch für Zuweisung als Master/Slave.
Ich hänge mal eine PDF an. Aber gut, sonst stellen wir das um auf Schaltplansymbole.

Die "Miniaturansichten" kommen dann immer ans Ende der Schaltpläne, als Übersicht.

Aber wie gesagt, das ist kein Problem, dann passen wir unsere Arbeitsweise etwas an und gut ist. So ein Symbol ist ja schnell erstellt

Maybe this issue will be caused by

m_insert_elements_query.bindValue(":type", elmt->linkTypeToString());

If I comment is work ... and db see correct element_type... thumbnail instead simple ..

@Joshua:
I tried to add thumbnail checkbox for exclude these items in BOM with no result, I saw with database export these items type is always Simple..
We need to create Element::Thumbnail
To be continued..

I added the type "thumbnail" (vignette in french) you can use it now.
Presently we can do nothing more with thumbnail type than simple type, but the element is marked as thumbnail and ready for future.

Yes

Exactly, this is the reason why we need to add a new element type : "thumbnail".

far⁹ future...

Thanks.

just so I understand you correctly:
What is called "front view" in the subject of this thred is what you call "thumbnail"?

These thumbnails are not supposed to appear as "duplicates" of schematic symbols in the BOM, that's right, Laurent. Then it may make sense that we also need a link between the schematic symbol and the thumbnail at some point, doesn't it?
There is Schematic-Software on the market that even goes further: They offer support for creating layout plans from the schematic, from which even drilling plans for mounting-plates are automatically generated that can be fed into a CNC. But that's still in the far future for QET!

Of course, I don't want to leave you alone with the work of scaling: You can count on my support to make the "deprecated" folder smaller! Didn't write "QET_ElementScaler" for nothing... 

I was also thinking about  thumbnails because I don't want them to appear in the BOM pages ... like terminal I want to uncheck them.

 
  For me I'm ok with your suggestion.
 
 

  I think we need to add it in the documentation and also in the wiki.
  About folders found in the "thumbnails for assembly plan" we need to move it into a new folder named "deprecated" and each time an element is drawed with the good scale factor add it to the good folder.
  This will take a lot of time.... Also I need to add a new element type "thumbnail".

The discussion about simple rules for elements doesn't seem to be getting "off the ground" properly.

@Joshua and
@scorpio810:
What more does it take to get things going here?
If we agree on rules, then we also need to write them down in the QET documentation and also make sure that they are followed. This also means that we have to regularly point out to the creators of elements that these rules exist. In some cases, this also means that individual elements need to be reworked (scaled) or even rejected...

With the elements that have been added in the meantime, I see again (or rather: still see) that the "wild mixture" of scaling factors continues.

If we do not talk about it, we will not be able to reach an agreement...

Software ist nichts ohne talentierte Menschen, die sie nutzen und ihre Lücken mit genialen Tricks füllen.
Und das Ergebnis wird auf der anderen Seite mittelmäßig sein, wenn man als Anfänger nicht allzu geschickt mit einer sehr umfassenden, leistungsstarken Software umgeht, die ein wenig zu komplex ist und oft ein kleines Vermögen kostet ......

Software is nothing without talented people who exploit it and fill its gaps with brilliant tricks.
And the result will be on the other hand mediocre with a beginner user not too skilful on a very complete software, powerful, a little too complex and also often costing a small fortune .....

https://download.qelectrotech.org/qet/s … roject.pdf