Renaming multiple objects in Windchill 10.0

[ptc-416608]

Enhancement Request:

Provide me a way to rename multiple parts in a Windchill Product context folder

(IBM garrity for Bruce Baker)

Nov 1, 2012

Duplicate with Enable the ability to Rename multiple unrelated objects that already exist in the Windchill PDMLink Commonspace

[BillRyan]

The idea below is very similar.  I'd recommend voting on it if you haven't done so. 

http://communities.ptc.com/ideas/1553

There are also enhancements and other discussions asking for the ability to rename multiple objects.  This is functionality we've been missing since leaving Intralink. 

http://communities.ptc.com/message/186891#186891

[hager]

I opened a enhancement request the 26th of November 2009 (E7412157)

I never got any response from PTC

It's good hearing my company is not alone for that need!

[MtnDog]

Yes, but there used to be the “Briefcase” where you could put a bunch of parts and then do perform edits.  It’s disappointing that didn’t get carried over, it was useful.

They have a “Clipboard” now but there’s no functionality in it.

[StevenDumon]

We have +/- 5000 objects created by the EFX instance creator that created models for fasteners, but didn't set the Document name. Renaming one by one goes really slow, batch rename could help us a lot.

[STEVEG]

It would be nice if PTC would comment on this as to the status of whether it will be added or not.

[BenLoosli]

Throw all of the parts needing renamed into an assembly, then do a rename on the assembly and it will grab all of the components which can then be renamed.

[STEVEG]

Ouch!  Then I would have to check in the assembly, rename everything then delete the assembly.  That would be even more time up until a certain number of files.  If we are talking 10 or 15 objects it wouldn't be worth it.  But if you are talking hundreds then maybe.

[JenniferPierron]

Parts: Multiple Rename

Product: PTC Windchill

Release: 11.0 F000

Benefit

You can rename multiple parts at once to save time and ensure consistency.

Additional Details

Previously, if you wanted to rename parts, you had to launch the Rename action for each part individually. Now, you can select multiple parts (and/or CAD Documents) and rename them all at once. Multiselect for Rename is available from the Search Results and Folders tables.

[STEVEG]

We don't use WTParts.

[JenniferPierron]

The action works as well for multiple CAD docs.

In 11.0, you can pick mutliple unrelated CAD Docs from a folders page or search result and then launch Rename.

Hope this helps.

[ChrisPLM]

Hello

Does it also apply for WTdocuments ?

Best regards

[JenniferPierron]

Hello Chris.

I am afraid we did not have time to support WTDocuments.  This point is still in our roadmap.   I think it would help if you could make a separate Product Idea for this to demonstrate its importance.  There is a similar request for Save As; but not for Rename.

Thanks

Jennifer

[STEVEG]

Great.  That will help immensely.

[ChrisPLM]

It is on the roadmap, so maybe it will come for 11.0 M20

Alternatively, Steve, I can give you the name of the company who developed the script for me for 10.1 as I mention in my other post

[MikeLockwood]

I'm not in any way advertising for them, but Fishbowl's Rename utility (which reads in a file) has worked perfectly for us.

[STEVEG]

Thank you Chris and Mike.

We have worked with Fishbowl before.

But the amount we do is significant enough that the feature will help but not enough to justify the cost.

[JariElomaa]

Hello Jennifer,

Thanks for the information on upcoming functionalities.

I think that these kind of functionalities (multiple rename, edit, revise, save as...) should be ALWAYS supported for all kinds of data objects or atleast for the following ones: WTParts, WTDocuments, EPMDocuments. This just creates confusion and frustration when a function works only for a certain type of object, but not for another. Please be consistent with the functionalities.

[JenniferPierron]

Understood.

For Windchill 11.0, we did not have enough bandwidth to support all three.  What are your thoughts on "trickling in" change?  Would you have preferred to have new functionality as soon as we can implement it or only see the change when all three objects can be supported?

Thanks

Jennifer

[JariElomaa]

My personal opinion is to bring the functionalities, at least to the mentioned three object types, all at once. I don't like the feeling of using an unfinished product.

Some people might feel differently and want to get their hands on new functionalities as soon as possible, but I don't mind waiting for a couple of months, if that makes the software more usable.

Thanks for your quick responses.

[jreding]

I would like to have the new functionality as soon as it can be implemented as long as that does not deprioritize providing the capability for the other objects in the next release.