Interesting that no one has posted here since last October.
I have an issue with the Internal Residential Door LC which could be very useful to me (and many others, I suspect).
Let’s start with the door framing (rails, muntins, transoms). You would normally expect the lock and bottom rails to be wider than the other frame members, partly for strength, and partly to accommodate the lock. I could live with those two being the same width but separately definable.
The door frame members are shown 35mm thick. That is the thickness of a flush door but no panelled door is likely to be that thin. 45mm is more like it.
Next frame locations. The lock rail and any transom will not be equally disposed. In a 4 panel door, if you did that, the handle would be much too high. So the lock rail tends to be at a consistent height. The transom (in a 6 panel door, for example) would be fairly near the top but ideally its height should be definable.
Now, the panels. You only have the option of plain, flat, Shaker style panels. It would be nice to have other options, such as raised & fielded, or boarded. Also, they are currently shown 10mm thick and off centre of door. In practice, panels are likely to be thicker and central.
Now, the surround (called “frame” here). The LC shows a rebated lining 15mm thick. That is way too thin. A normal lining in the UK is at least 26mm thick. Also, it is shown as being mitre joined when they are normally rebated together (this only matters because the join line shows).
Display. A lot of lines you don’t want to see, such as join lines, have not been hidden. Others, such as the junction between frame and inset panel, that you would expect to see, are not visible.
Size. The overall size defines the width across the lining. That is logical if you are placing the component into a pre-prepared opening. But designers usually go by the door width, which tends to be from a standard set. The door frame or lining then widens the whole by whatever amount. This would be more important if the component were able to cut walls, which would be very handy.
I feel like I am being over-critical, but I imagine these are things that could be improved fairly easily. And if LCs are to be taken up with any greater alacrity than DCs, this is the kind of detail designers will expect.