« Archive: Generate for Windows | Main | Archive: Future of Simulation with Comet »

Oct 17, 2018


Rob Roef

Dear Ralph,

First, I’d like to thank you for this article. It puts the finger on the sore spot and, once again, clearly indicates that the market is insufficiently informed about the level of cooperation through open BIM standards.

To begin, IFC is not an exchange format, but rather a collaboration format. IFC is not intended for round-tripping, but rather to inform partners in the (design and construction) process in the way that it should be done -- by everyone taking their own responsibility and exchanging meaningful information.

I believe that bypassing the shortcomings in IFC is not solved by developing direct links in an API. After all, there is so much more specialized software on the market than we can imagine. Focusing on collaboration and less on compatibility will increase the acceptance of IFC (and other open standards).

Best regards,

Rob Roef
OPEN BIM Program Manager

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)


Search This Blog



Thank you for visiting!