<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: A Kink in the Digital Pipeline</title>
	<atom:link href="http://insight.designworldonline.com/2008/05/10/a-kink-in-the-digital-pipeline/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://insight.designworldonline.com/2008/05/10/a-kink-in-the-digital-pipeline/</link>
	<description></description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2008 04:12:00 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: MattMurphy</title>
		<link>http://insight.designworldonline.com/2008/05/10/a-kink-in-the-digital-pipeline/#comment-67</link>
		<dc:creator>MattMurphy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 10:21:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://insight.designworldonline.com/?p=38#comment-67</guid>
		<description>I believe the modern thought consensus is in freedom of choice for the CAD operators - as long as there is a platform that all parties can collaborate with.  Where I work we use the DWF viewer.  On a recent project we used AutoCAD MEP and a client used CATIA.  We were able to work together using a combined model.  It worked great and neither of us were hindered by CAD standards or using software that we were unfamiliar with.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I believe the modern thought consensus is in freedom of choice for the CAD operators - as long as there is a platform that all parties can collaborate with.  Where I work we use the DWF viewer.  On a recent project we used AutoCAD MEP and a client used CATIA.  We were able to work together using a combined model.  It worked great and neither of us were hindered by CAD standards or using software that we were unfamiliar with.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
