Hello,

We are trying to use the Deformable / Deformed functionality in 3DEXPERIENCE, and we are running into an identification problem in XEN.

In our company, we normally treat Enterprise Item Number (EIN) + Revision as the business identifier for uniqueness.

However, with Deformable / Deformed, it seems that:

• Deformable and Deformed can share the same EIN
• but their revisions are managed independently

For example:

• Deformable: 123456, Rev 1.1
• Deformed: 123456, Rev 5.1

The practical issue is that, in XEN, a Deformed item is not always clearly distinguishable from its source Deformable item unless the user explicitly checks the “Deformed From” relationship.

From a user point of view, this creates ambiguity because the visible identifier in the list/table is not sufficient to make the distinction obvious. As a result, EIN + Revision no longer works as a unique business identifier in the way we normally expect.

So I would like to ask:

1. Is this the expected standard behavior of Deformable / Deformed in 3DEXPERIENCE?
2. How do other companies usually define uniqueness in this case?
   • Object Type + EIN + Revision?
   • separate numbering for Deformed items?
   • custom title/name rules?
3. Is there a supported best practice to make Deformed and Deformable easier to distinguish in XEN?
4. Has anyone solved this through configuration, display rules, naming rules, or governance without heavy customization?

Our main goal is to avoid user confusion and preserve a clear uniqueness rule for released engineering items.

Any best-practice advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you.