Jump to content

GDTF Forum

Old Builder File Loaded To New Builder Wheel Issue


Recommended Posts

Hey Y'all,

So, I loaded a tested file that is currently in use in the field and when I went to the DMX section, there's numerous errors but all referring to Wheel assigments. From what I understand, the new builder is suppose to re-assign the information appropriately to the new areas, but it seems that's not the case with anything associated with wheels. 

image.thumb.png.1a7e711d4374452265be30fb3683b87e.png

This unassignment happens on every fixture I bring in that was built from the original builder, do I need to go back and update all my files?

Cheers!

MattG

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Matt,

yes. The old builder provided the same way to enter this info but less way to check if you didn't forget anything or made any error. So it is useful to go through all previously made files to double check for errors.

And yes, also for us, it meant full re-checking on all files...¯\_(ツ)_/¯  but this is actually typically very quick. If you don$t know what is wrong, use also the Summary Tab, where you get errors listed together with their causes.

cheers

Petr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Matt,

>That is very unfortunate

Sorry about this.

>so, is there a plan for the future if you have to check over 100+ files that you shouldn't have to do that.....?

Absolutely, this is why a huge effort was put into the validation as it is now.

Having said that, as the actual implementation in software has progressed dramatically, there will be an update to the specification itself in near future, bringing up more, new features/clarifications, so this might mean more edits for the older files if you like to add some of the new additional data. But these will all be details, the core remains.

cheers

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So, since I know it's only the wheels that are affected right now, is there a way to prevent anything like this from happening in the future as more features get put in, as it get's more depth to the builder? I know we are adding in really awesome vaidation features, but over time it shouldn't really break thing's that have already been pre-defined when pushing new builds online. I would think that anything that has been predefined should be fine, I'm curious as to how we see this as an efficient ask for users who are making their own profiles as they now have to go and check all their work again and do double time once they put in the initial time. Oh well haha! Thanks for the info on this so that we know to check everything as new builds get pushed! 

Cheers!

MattG  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Matt,

> I know we are adding in really awesome vaidation features, but over time it shouldn't really break thing's that have already been pre-defined when pushing new builds online

This is not really about syntactical stuff but rather about cross checking, for example when assigning Wheel slots into DMX Sets, but not assigning a Wheel to the Channel Function, which a user error, rather then syntax issue, but it of course is much better to indicate in the builder if something is missing while doing the editing. As i mentioned, it is where the practical implementation allows us to see that some parts are not filled in by the user. And based on that, we have been extending the validations. The required changes are typically very small, considering the possible complexity of the complete GDTF file if fully filled up.

So, sorry about it, progress... ?

Cheers

P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.