Hi, I got seamly working and used my first pattern. But now I upgraded and I can’t open the pattern anymore
I got the following message (in Dutch)
File exception.
Uitzondering: Element piece is missing child element.
Validatie fout bestand …. Basispatroon_Slip_naam.sm2d op lijn 175 kolom 105
What should I do?
Marieke
I am trying to attach the file, but don’t know ow to attach a document in this forum How can I do this?
Basispatroon_Slip_naam.sm2d (24,8 KB)
I can’t open this file after the upgrade
I see that you are still missing 1 update. The pattern shows that you’re on 0.7.2 while my pattern is showing 0.7.3, so if you go to Menu > About Seamly2D and click the Check for Updates button, you should be able to download and install the latest from Monday (I don’t know if anything changed between the 2, but it’s best to keep up to date).
However, this doesn’t fix the problem, which seems to be in the pattern pieces:
I’ve removed all of the pattern pieces and now your pattern, at least, works:
Basispatroon_Slip_naam_Rev1.sm2d (16.6 KB)
You didn’t send the measurements file, so I couldn’t check it.
Perhaps @Douglas or @Pneumarian can check to see exactly what the problem is.
Here’s the file with just the bad piece (PatroonDeel_1) removed, I’m still going to spend a little time seeing if I can fix it: Basispatroon_Slip_naam_Rev2.sm2d (24.1 KB)
You JUST beat me to it. 
Can’t fix the missing piece as we don’t know what the nodes were.
There is also a Union tool in the modeling section, and yet there is no “united” piece?
Also there’s no measurment file so can’t fully open the paattern.
Really makes me want to implement the zipping a pattern and it’s components issue as it would help solve this.
I’m pretty sure that the items in the modeling section marked inUse="false" were the pertinent ones, so it probably wasn’t wanted anyway. The Union section may be related, but hewing that out left the pattern unusable. I don’t think the few kb weight savings are worth chasing this any further.
I had a measurements file which was compatible. So I know it works, but could use refinement on the formulae. But, yeah, it’s not often that people stick to the “known” measurements.
If a modleing tool / node is marked inuse=“false” the garbage collector will remove the tool / node the next time the pattern is opened.
I deleted that tool (and it’s point nodes) and it opens… upto where it wants the ME file. Again the Union tool is marked as inUse=“true”, but there is no united piece.
