"I could place it as a cell but then you can't clip boundaries. "
Hmmm...
This would be a good CR to be able to add this kind of functionality to the Place Cell tool. SS3 can clip in 3d any Ref attachment... and cells are supposedly very similar to Refs internally. So.... maybe inserting cells should be part of the inserting Ref tool 'under the hood' so that we can get access to things like using nesting depth, level control (?!),Named Groups, CVE's, Saved Views, presentation styles, flipping between models (very topical for ABD which is due for an imminent upgrade/consolidation of its Compound Cells tools)... etc. You road guys have even more exciting stuff in the pipeline with Civil Cells.
An interim fix would be for Bentley to modify the Move Tool not to drop the cell when you use the fence clip option.You could then use the Move tool to 'clip' your cell. Or the cell boundary box could be exposed (Ctrl B: Fast Cells to see the boundaries) and accessed via handles?
Once the 'Ref' is placed... it can then be 'dumbed-down' into a cell. This may be the point where some sort of link could be made between the cell 'Instance' and its 'Reference' so that when it comes time for an update, there is a record/link somewhere. With SS3, there are 'anonymous' Ref attachments that don't get displayed in the Ref Dialog. Maybe, there could be a sub category/tab where the 'enabling' Ref's used to insert cells could be stored. The enabling or 'proto-cell' Ref attachments would store the linking paths and other settings.
Edit-Cells-in-place: This is a VERY popular request. We already have Activate-Refs-in-place. If Cell insertion is re-jigged to be a seemless extension of Ref attachment, then it should be easy to 'turn the clock back' and 'back-Ref' the model(s) used to create the cell 'into-place'... allow the user to use the existing 'Activate-Ref' tools to make the changes... offer the option to version those changes (either using Design History, or as a separate model in the cell lib dgn.
'Cabinet' worflow:
Yes, this is a pretty common problem.... and SS3's Ref-based Hypermodeling / DV tools have a lot of the pieces to the puzzle. In theory, you should be able start in 3d and use the Place Callout tool to generate the elevations you need and save the model in the DV seed dgnlib. Even if you don't model the cabinet in 3d, you should be able to use the DV tools to keep everything aligned in the 2d drawing/sheet model. Mstn has always been better than ACAD here as you could always snap across 'viewports' in 'paperspace'.
Associative alignment: I think this is more of a base Ref tool gap, and less of a DV thing. Attaching a Ref using a Saved View already overrides the Ref's origin with a new insertion point based on the SV's View Center. It would make a lot of sense to provide more control over how we define the Ref's insertion point/rotation.
As mentioned previously, making the insertion point/rotation more intelligent or 'info-centric' by linking it to 'named' feature-based 'locator' or 'connector'-type info and parameters, expressions, constraints-solving outputs is everyday practice in the MCAD and animation world. The old ways of attaching everything at the model global origin to keep alignment never really worked and is unsustainable in these BIM-crazy times. Seems to me that ACS' are the obvious first candidate.
The Ref attachment settings dialog should have two additional input boxes above 'Detail Scale' for 'Insertion Point' + 'Rotation'. The first box would have dropdown options for 'global origin', and a list of ACS' stored in the incoming Ref. The second box would have corresponding options for the local 'global origin and ACS'. The second box would also sync with the current OffsetX,Y,Z coordinates and Rotation boxes in the Ref Dialog. This should allow the user to control how Mstn loads and aligns the Refs (and Cells, hopefully!) based on how ACS's are matched up. Any local offsets from the selected ACS's can be stored using expressions. Piggyback'd on the Named Expressions + DDD/Feature Solids i.e. those 'already paid-for' tools?
I think the Ref-based Hypermodeling + CVE tools are well placed to transform Mstn's cell workflows for the better. especially where 2d projective views of 3d elements are concerned. Hypermodeling is being sold as an a hybrid 'middle way' that bridges 2d and 3d working that doesn't force everything to be 3d or nothing... duh. To do this, we so need to be able to robustly 'spatially' index (i.e. minimising manual attaching+aligning) and link everything. And everything here increasingly means 'components' not loose primitives like lines etc... i.e. CELLS. I think it is getting very MCAD-like, resulting in increased urgency for 'edit-in-place' and 'smart attachment'-type tools.
So, if you make some 2d elevations of your cabinet, you can 'back-Ref' the elevations into the 3d model, and check for whatever. Need to change the 2d drawing to align with something in the 3d model? Simples... Activate your 2d drawing in-context. Is it a cell or a Ref? Doesn't matter... call it 'information mobility' if you want :-)
Or if you are in your 2d elevation drawing model, Mstn already allows you to ref a 3d model into a 2d one, which is quite unique in the AEC market (Spaceclaim et al can do this as well). You can back-ref the local 3d model of your cabinet stored in the cel lib.... or ref any of the other elevations (stored in separate models, but linked/aligned by using common ACS info). The auto/smart alignment of all that drawn info would make updating changes a lot quicker less error-prone.... the main reason behind 'forcing everything to be 3d'.
Auto-alignment or 'back-referencing' is key to making Cells much more usable and bigger participants in the design. At the moment, they are not really very dynamic participants and are relegated to simple 'symbol' tasks that do not need much editing/changes once they are placed. There will still be a place for this, but we also need more 'dynamic' cells to support more dynamic workflows that are more 'Ref'-like... without all the overheads all of the time.