Hi andras, yes that is a pretty big issue to be decided, whether things like fills go as a property of a style (which makes it kind of a "preset" which can then be more easily applied to many objects and also edited in one place to change), or whether it is a property that gets applied to an object individually.

It's also possible to have both, where a style could maybe have a set of "default" properties including a fill set with the style, but also allow objects to override it. This may make for a somewhat more complicated UI though, which is kind of bad. But it may be worth it for the flexibility it would offer.

Those kinds of trade-offs with "more flexibility" being the benefit, but "more complex UI" being the cost are difficult areas to work on, which tend to take me some time to analyze and plan.

- Michael

using two way is very complicated I think because after two weeks from project start we could get 1000 modification sometime. and searching where is the fill atribute and what is the actualy one is very annoying :)

some cases:
1.,
We have got a layered wall with three components (structure, insulation, plaster)
the whole wall is one Object. but the three components have sparate fill sign.
In this case the fill atribute is better for Styles eaches.
2.,
We have got a layered wall with three components (structure, insulation, plaster)
the whole wall is one Group. but the three components have sparate fill sign.
In this case the fill atribute is better for Objects eaches.

It is really dificult it depends on a lot of things mainly the program structure I gues. :S
But my my opinion that using with only one place Object OR Style.