Jump to content

Kizza

Member
  • Posts

    994
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Kizza

  1. I agree.

    Check out an early thread of mine - in my first post I stated that I missed the temporary dimension feature. VW's set position feature doesn't go far enough to be really useful in comparison.

    Also, a post from Ariel in the same thread is worth a read.

    Starting Out with VW

    What does in some small way make up for the temporary dimension feature is that VW convert shapes to objects makes changes quite quick. We do have associative dimensions which can lock onto walls and will move when the value is changed but is not as intuitive as Revit's temporary dimensions (and has a tendency to screw up wall joins)

  2. +1 to the visibility templates, they should also be able to be applied to SLVP's.

    Maybe to allow those that are used to the existing class management scheme to continue in their workflow.

    But my opinion is that if a class visibility template is applied to the design layer then there would be less need to tweak classes in the SLVP.

    After all, the goal is total WYSIWYG in the design layer...

  3. What about this?

    Class Group/Set = A selection of classes grouped together. They can be turned on, off and greyed as a group.

    Layer Group/Set = A selection of layers grouped together. They can be turned on, off and greyed as a group.

    Visibility template = A saveable, user defineable collection of visibility settings of individual classes, layers, and class and layer groups that can be applied and attached to a design layer. A visibility template should also be able to set the view and render style.

    A user could:

    - Use classes and layers as they are now (no change to present workflow)

    - They could use class and layer grouping to control groups of classes and layers

    - They could use the visibility template for complete control of classes and layers.

  4. My wish in this thread is for class types or "sets"

    But implementing class types in VW requires that all objects be automatically assignable to a class. Some objects in VW cannot presently be automatically assigned to a class e.g. drawing labels and viewports. Why not?

    Hence, the two go hand in hand, class types and complete autoclassing.

    My proposed implementation allows you to have as many or few (or none) class types as you desire. I could have all my door classes in a door class type and all my windows in a window class type. I can turn all these classes on/off with two clicks instead of 20.

    Add to this the capacity to save class visibilities to class types and apply them to design layers, viewports etc and you really start to leverage the power of layers and classes in VW.

    Revit is not the only program that handles objects in this way. I believe Archicad does as well.

    And BTW, if autoclassing of all VW objects was user controllable, your class list can be as broad or compact as you wish...

    P.S. I spent two years on Autocad - I think it's scarred me..

  5. I think the thought behind this is strongly related to Standard Naming and Auto-classing.

    You've hit the nail on the head Vincent, I'm sure Archicad handles it similarly as well.

    For group classing to work, autoclassing of ALL objects (including all annotation objects!) within VW must be achievable.

    I tinkered again with standard naming and autoclassing the other day. I made limited progress. They appear to be half-baked.

  6. Is the key here the ability to control the visibility of multiple classes as one?

    Yes, and to increase my productivity by not having to scroll through and manipulate lists of classes.

    I think Grouping of Classes should be a distinct feature (i.e. not linked but grouped) although you could perhaps include the ability to right click a class and add to group.

    One of the possibilities the grouping of classes will achieve:

    You can assign classes to a group - Existing, Proposed, Demolished etc and turn them on or off at will.

    And of course, to be able to assign a view and a class group to a Design Layer would be a big thumbs up in my book.

    Class Group and View assignable to Design Layer

  7. In a hidden line render of a building elevation on a site I would like to be able to turn off the DTM triangulations and have just the contours showing.

    (I want to achieve the look you get with 3D Contours turned on, and 3D Style set to 3D Mesh Solid - without all the DTM segment lines which show in Hidden Line)

  8. We need to be able to group classes by type.

    And we need to be able to control the visibility of the class types.

    And the visibilities of classes and class types needs to be saveable so they can be applied and reused.

    Fiddling endlessly with classes is tiresome.... there must be a better way.

    maybe on creation of the class you can assign a "Type" to it, such as, Landscape, Annotations, Furniture, Structure etc.

  9. My 2 cents on this is that they need to focus on fixing the tools they have provided, not on releasing new tools that also don't work...

    I would agree with you if I didn't just happen to finish hatching a heap of elevations in a SLVP........

×
×
  • Create New...