![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
This has been touched on before, but I am unhappy having Autodesk listed in the infobox as the developer (the actual tect in the macro is 'owner') of DWG. They have no exclusive right to develop DWG and clearly don't own it, as has been covered before. If I don't hear clear evidence to the contrary I will hide the 'owner' field in the macro which will leave the 'Developer' field hidden. I'll wait at least until 2008-09-18 -- DuLithgow ( talk) 09:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the link to http://www.dwggateway.com/index.html DWG Gateway v3 by SolidWorks, because it depends on AutoCAD being installed, which natively reads DWG files itself, so I don't know what the point of that app is! -- DuLithgow ( talk) 08:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I tagged as cleanup-spam due to the list of external links (particularly under Viewers and converters). Few of these links were rmed, but the cleanup tag was. Is there a reason why ALL of these programs are notable enough for inclusion in this article? Most other file format articles don't list a dozen apps which can open said file format. -- Karnesky 17:04, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
No it doesn't. This is objective enough, because it talks about the OpenDWG format as well.
I know Autodesk isn't good at releasing documentation on this, but has there been any efforts on documenting this from a third party, at least as for the vector basics, and publicizing what was found online based on reverse engineering the format? -- Northgrove 09:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
The following doesn't seem to make sense: "Several companies exist that [who?] reverse-engineer the DWG file format, in an attempt to provide DWG read and write capabilities from [for?] other design programs"
The following needs to be amended:
Is this going to be updated every couple of years? Although from the pure logic aspect “over 25 years ago” shall be true to eternity, I suggest to replace “over 25 years ago”, by a date, even an approximate one, shall make more sense.
Is that exactly about every few years, or approximately about every few years? There must be a better way to state this. -
The following is confusing:
Is your a typo and should read their? Or is it referring to the user's own/preferred library? -
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.126.103.130 ( talk) 23:51, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Someone has removed without justification the section about the controversy between Autodesk and Open Design Alliance for having freely distributed a library supporting the DWG format. Reverted. ALoopingIcon 21:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I undid two anonymous spin-job edits from 198.102.112.18, which tracks back to Autodesk, Inc. (see http://cqcounter.com/whois/index.php?query=198.102.112.18).
Note that the claim of the information being "confidential" or "proprietary" is essentially meaningless. If Autodesk wishes to claim information as trade secret, then it has explicit rights under the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act. EvanYares 09:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Double entry of questions, both for "DWG" and "Autocad" Wikipedia entries, which I would like to get answered: Autocad was a just-2D CAD software in the 1980th and in the 1990th ( Autocad R13 is still just-2D) a) So which was the first release of Autocad supporting 3D ? b) So which was the first time, that Autocad stored 3D information in its DWG ( and DXF ) output files ? c) Did 3D-CAD products of other companies store 3D informations in DWG ( and DXF ) files earlier than Autocad ? If so, please supply name of the product&manufacturer & date of release c) Was there a change necessary in the formats, for the turn from 2D to 3D ? d) Which was the first free/commercial DWG / DXF "viewer" applications with 3D support, and when ? It would be also interesting to document the story of DWG/DXF viewers, which slighly differs from the story of the real CAD products. hemmerling ( talk) 06:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
a) 2.1 first, but 10 was said to have full support, what ever that meant. But since Autocad was meant to be the cheapest CAD software, first for under $1000, not the best was it not very suitable for 3D-modelling, and is still not the best choice for most 3D-modelling.
b and c) Dwg is older than Autocad, it was the format of Interact CAD, but the format hs changed there is not one dwg, Autcad call all of its different, new but similair formats dwg. Dxf haseen supported since 1.0, but the format changed with 2.0 and later a binary dxf was introduces
c) Maybe in the early dxf format. But that depends on waht you mean by 3D, lines in 3D has been supported for very long, but solids not that long etc. The dwg of autocad 2000 seems to be able to handle all now excisting objects.
Here can muc of Autocads history be found: http://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/www/autoframe.html
Grotte ( talk) 20:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was move to .dwg Duja ► 12:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
The DWG page was moved to AutoCAD DWG last February, based on User:DragonHawk's request, with this reason: "Become consistent with AutoCAD DXF; general Wikipedia guideline of avoiding abbrev's in article titles"
Nice idea, but unfortunate.
The AutoCAD DWG page should be moved back to DWG, and the AutoCAD DXF page should be moved to DXF. EvanYares 08:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Someone requested a citation on the fact that DWG is a de facto standard. I removed it as no citation is needed. It's well documented in the article that the file format is widespread, and there is no international standard for CAD drawing file format in existence. Please do not make such requests, unless you have a reasonable doubt about any of the two facts. Llewelyn MT ( talk) 14:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Please excuse my ignorance, but I find it hard (in the article or elsewhere) finding out the image type or category that .dwg files belong to. But of course .dwg means a file format, as the article states, but that doesn't help much. Can anyone add an expert commentary? Thanks! -- AVM ( talk) 17:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
IMHO the chapter "Free Viewer" is confusing, because with DWGTrueView there is a "free" viewer. But it is not "open source". The title or the chapter should consider this difference. -- 194.204.66.38 ( talk) 10:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:20, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
As this version shows https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=.dwg&diff=644991454&oldid=534761901 there used to be a history section. Does anyone know why it was removed? -- duncan.lithgow ( talk) 16:17, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Can I move this to DWG or DWG (file format) to be consistent with other articles like IGES, STL (file format), DXF?
Wonderfl (reply) 18:07, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
So I guess I have to agree with this issue. But it's hard to know what to do about it? So here I will see if we can start a list of what we think are good secondary or tertiary sources to use. Please sign after each addition so we can discuss and disagreements. At the time of writing this a rather pitiful list so I hope we can grow it. I know there are other CAD publications out there, I just can't think of any more. -- duncan.lithgow ( talk) 13:44, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Others to consider:
A complete list of valid registered internet media types is available here: http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml
Within that list, there is no mention of several of the internet media types that are listed in this article which leads me to believe they are not valid. David Condrey log talk 01:38, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
|
This has been touched on before, but I am unhappy having Autodesk listed in the infobox as the developer (the actual tect in the macro is 'owner') of DWG. They have no exclusive right to develop DWG and clearly don't own it, as has been covered before. If I don't hear clear evidence to the contrary I will hide the 'owner' field in the macro which will leave the 'Developer' field hidden. I'll wait at least until 2008-09-18 -- DuLithgow ( talk) 09:32, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I've removed the link to http://www.dwggateway.com/index.html DWG Gateway v3 by SolidWorks, because it depends on AutoCAD being installed, which natively reads DWG files itself, so I don't know what the point of that app is! -- DuLithgow ( talk) 08:56, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
I tagged as cleanup-spam due to the list of external links (particularly under Viewers and converters). Few of these links were rmed, but the cleanup tag was. Is there a reason why ALL of these programs are notable enough for inclusion in this article? Most other file format articles don't list a dozen apps which can open said file format. -- Karnesky 17:04, 16 March 2006 (UTC)
No it doesn't. This is objective enough, because it talks about the OpenDWG format as well.
I know Autodesk isn't good at releasing documentation on this, but has there been any efforts on documenting this from a third party, at least as for the vector basics, and publicizing what was found online based on reverse engineering the format? -- Northgrove 09:58, 7 August 2006 (UTC)
The following doesn't seem to make sense: "Several companies exist that [who?] reverse-engineer the DWG file format, in an attempt to provide DWG read and write capabilities from [for?] other design programs"
The following needs to be amended:
Is this going to be updated every couple of years? Although from the pure logic aspect “over 25 years ago” shall be true to eternity, I suggest to replace “over 25 years ago”, by a date, even an approximate one, shall make more sense.
Is that exactly about every few years, or approximately about every few years? There must be a better way to state this. -
The following is confusing:
Is your a typo and should read their? Or is it referring to the user's own/preferred library? -
— Preceding unsigned comment added by 202.126.103.130 ( talk) 23:51, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
Someone has removed without justification the section about the controversy between Autodesk and Open Design Alliance for having freely distributed a library supporting the DWG format. Reverted. ALoopingIcon 21:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)
I undid two anonymous spin-job edits from 198.102.112.18, which tracks back to Autodesk, Inc. (see http://cqcounter.com/whois/index.php?query=198.102.112.18).
Note that the claim of the information being "confidential" or "proprietary" is essentially meaningless. If Autodesk wishes to claim information as trade secret, then it has explicit rights under the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act. EvanYares 09:00, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Double entry of questions, both for "DWG" and "Autocad" Wikipedia entries, which I would like to get answered: Autocad was a just-2D CAD software in the 1980th and in the 1990th ( Autocad R13 is still just-2D) a) So which was the first release of Autocad supporting 3D ? b) So which was the first time, that Autocad stored 3D information in its DWG ( and DXF ) output files ? c) Did 3D-CAD products of other companies store 3D informations in DWG ( and DXF ) files earlier than Autocad ? If so, please supply name of the product&manufacturer & date of release c) Was there a change necessary in the formats, for the turn from 2D to 3D ? d) Which was the first free/commercial DWG / DXF "viewer" applications with 3D support, and when ? It would be also interesting to document the story of DWG/DXF viewers, which slighly differs from the story of the real CAD products. hemmerling ( talk) 06:19, 19 January 2008 (UTC)
a) 2.1 first, but 10 was said to have full support, what ever that meant. But since Autocad was meant to be the cheapest CAD software, first for under $1000, not the best was it not very suitable for 3D-modelling, and is still not the best choice for most 3D-modelling.
b and c) Dwg is older than Autocad, it was the format of Interact CAD, but the format hs changed there is not one dwg, Autcad call all of its different, new but similair formats dwg. Dxf haseen supported since 1.0, but the format changed with 2.0 and later a binary dxf was introduces
c) Maybe in the early dxf format. But that depends on waht you mean by 3D, lines in 3D has been supported for very long, but solids not that long etc. The dwg of autocad 2000 seems to be able to handle all now excisting objects.
Here can muc of Autocads history be found: http://www.fourmilab.ch/autofile/www/autoframe.html
Grotte ( talk) 20:29, 20 January 2008 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was move to .dwg Duja ► 12:40, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
The DWG page was moved to AutoCAD DWG last February, based on User:DragonHawk's request, with this reason: "Become consistent with AutoCAD DXF; general Wikipedia guideline of avoiding abbrev's in article titles"
Nice idea, but unfortunate.
The AutoCAD DWG page should be moved back to DWG, and the AutoCAD DXF page should be moved to DXF. EvanYares 08:14, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
Someone requested a citation on the fact that DWG is a de facto standard. I removed it as no citation is needed. It's well documented in the article that the file format is widespread, and there is no international standard for CAD drawing file format in existence. Please do not make such requests, unless you have a reasonable doubt about any of the two facts. Llewelyn MT ( talk) 14:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC)
Please excuse my ignorance, but I find it hard (in the article or elsewhere) finding out the image type or category that .dwg files belong to. But of course .dwg means a file format, as the article states, but that doesn't help much. Can anyone add an expert commentary? Thanks! -- AVM ( talk) 17:00, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
IMHO the chapter "Free Viewer" is confusing, because with DWGTrueView there is a "free" viewer. But it is not "open source". The title or the chapter should consider this difference. -- 194.204.66.38 ( talk) 10:36, 23 August 2010 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:20, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 13:21, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
As this version shows https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=.dwg&diff=644991454&oldid=534761901 there used to be a history section. Does anyone know why it was removed? -- duncan.lithgow ( talk) 16:17, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
Can I move this to DWG or DWG (file format) to be consistent with other articles like IGES, STL (file format), DXF?
Wonderfl (reply) 18:07, 31 January 2015 (UTC)
So I guess I have to agree with this issue. But it's hard to know what to do about it? So here I will see if we can start a list of what we think are good secondary or tertiary sources to use. Please sign after each addition so we can discuss and disagreements. At the time of writing this a rather pitiful list so I hope we can grow it. I know there are other CAD publications out there, I just can't think of any more. -- duncan.lithgow ( talk) 13:44, 3 February 2015 (UTC)
Others to consider:
A complete list of valid registered internet media types is available here: http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml
Within that list, there is no mention of several of the internet media types that are listed in this article which leads me to believe they are not valid. David Condrey log talk 01:38, 12 July 2015 (UTC)