Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Possible discrepancy: Are both FootPrint and Axis required for Alignment Geometry - Horizontal and Vertical? #742

Open
RickBrice opened this issue Dec 7, 2023 · 0 comments

Comments

@RickBrice
Copy link

Looking at concept templates 4.1.7.1.1.1 Alignment Geometry - Horizontal and 4.1.7.1.1.2 Alignment Geometry - Horizontal and Vertical, the RepresentationIdentifier for the IfcCompositeCurve in the Horizontal case is Axis and it is FootPrint for the Horizontal and Vertical case.

Taken at face value, that would mean for Alignment Geometry - Horizontal and Vertical IfcAlignment.Representation.Representations must equal 3.

  1. "Axis" and "Curve2D" for Horizontal only
  2. "FootPrint" and "Curve2D" for Horizontal and Vertical (for the IfcCompositeCurve)
  3. "Axis" and "Curve3D" for Horizontal and Vertical (for the IfcGradientCurve)

The same is true for CT 4.1.7.1.1.3 Alignment Geometry - Horizontal, Vertical, and Cant

As is, complying with CT 4.1.7.1.1.2 and .3 does not implicitly provide compliance with CT 4.1.7.1.1.1.

Is it intended that the RepresentationIdentifier for the horizontal geometry only be different?
If this is just a documentation discrepancy, should "FootPrint" be changed to "Axis" in the vertical and cant CTs, or should "Axis" be changed to "FootPrint" in the horizontal only CT?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant