Peter (RDF Ltd.)

@aothms , we have a set of artificial test files for IFC4.3, you can find them here: https://github.com/IFCRail/IFC-Rail-Unit-Test-Reference-Code/tree/master/alignment_testset/IFC-WithGeneratedGeometry I am not sure what is the status for IFC4.3 real life...

I agree that this point together with quantities would be sufficient for now, @aothms are the surface area, volume, surface genus quantities already part of 4.3? If not and there...

Sounds perfect to me!

I agree we should define the RepresentationIdentifier, however not sure it is always Body, nonetheless I can life with this restriciton. I do agree we should at least have Net...

I am okay to make IfcSpiral.Position mandatory, still would also be okay with the implicit rule already available that in the context of an IfcCurveSegment the IfcSpiral.Position is mandatory while...

I am in favor of option3, but of course also okay with option 4

Hi @I-Sokolov and @CBenghi, the most logical part where we can further describe this IDS support is our documentation I guess. I will have a look, Thanks.

Agree, however I would even say IfcCompositeCurve, IfcGradientCurve or IfcSegmentedReferenceCurve. So in short IfcCompositeCurve and all entities inheriting from it.

Hi @I-Sokolov and @aothms, is it maybe an idea to add such recognized warnings to the validation output? For the known cases in existing schemas we need to make some...

Maybe, still something to think about. My higher level view would be that such data would be better fitted in schema semantics, i.e. the attribute EndPoint compared to specific use...