Workflow guide · Updated October 7, 2026
Prepare DXF revisions for a useful review.
A reliable comparison needs a known baseline, consistent exports and a reviewer who can verify changes in the original CAD environment.
Start with the intended pair
Choose the last relevant release as the baseline and the proposed revision as the current drawing. Record their revision labels and issue purpose. Keep the source files available so a reviewer can resolve questions raised by the exports.
Export standalone ASCII DXF
Use the CAD application's export settings to create ASCII DXF files. In the current DraftVerge prototype, each file is limited to 3 MB and 50,000 drawing objects. Required title-block checks apply to the configured top-level insertion; nested title blocks require separate verification.
Review dependencies in CAD
Check external drawings and other dependencies in the source environment. DraftVerge can identify external drawing references but does not open or validate their contents. Do not treat an export as evidence that every dependency is present or current.
Check the comparison frame
Verify units, origin and orientation. DraftVerge initially fits before-and-after views independently. Linked Model views require matching known insertion units and an explicit user confirmation of the coordinate frame. There is no automatic registration or unit conversion.
Interpret candidate changes carefully
DraftVerge identifies differences in drawing data and handles. An exporter can rewrite identifiers without changing the design. Candidate changes therefore need inspection; the report does not establish geometric equivalence or identify every meaningful design change.
Preserve the review context
Record confirmed issues, explained exceptions and unresolved findings. Export the worksheet and applied standard for resuming checks against the same files. The offline HTML handoff includes review data and drawing fingerprints, not the drawing bytes or rendered previews.
Validate the workflow before depending on it
Use explicitly authorized examples, have a qualified reviewer mark expected issues and measure misses and false positives. Track the complete review cycle—including setup, CAD verification and handoff—rather than timing only the automated check.