Confusing terminology - Layers & Sheet Layers

[Hamo]

Vectorworks.  Please. Please. Stop referring to 'Sheets' as 'Sheet Layers' in tutorials.

To use the term 'layers' in referring to sheets is incorrect terminology and very confusing for new users.

 

Sheets are not layers. 

Sheets contain layers (& classes) incorporated as viewports.

Sheets cannot be 'Layered'.

 

[twk]

I agree, they are not layers, but to the point of referring to them in tutorials, at this point, it looks like they have to as they are called "Sheet Layers" in the actual drawing user interface.

 

Also, (nitpicking here 😄), sheets do not 'contain' layers, they can contain Viewports that contain layers, and classes.

 

 

But you're totally right, I only comment on this as I'm in the process of explaining the Vectorworks ecosystem to a Revit user currently on-boarding. The terminology should be changed to just "Sheets" on the drawing user interface.

 

 

Edited January 9, 2023 by twk

[Andy Broomell]

Technically Vectorworks has "Design Layers" and "Sheet Layers." Both of these together comprise "Layers" in Vectorworks; at any given moment, you have one Active Layer that you are drawing on, and this can be either a Design Layer or a Sheet Layer. That's why Design Layers and Sheet Layers are in the same dropdown list in the view bar. They're indeed different types of Layers. 

 

That being said, while your initial comment that "Sheets are not layers" is inherently incorrect, it does stem from a valid criticism of the terminology in the program. "Design Layers" are often colloquially called "Layers" as shorthand, so it's then confusing when a user hears "Sheet Layer." Shortening the latter to "Sheets" makes a lot of sense. You're not the first to request that these names be reexamined, and I'd back up that request as well. As Tai points out, the change would have to happen first in the UI of the software itself, and then the tutorials could be updated to stay consistent with the UI. But as it stands, the tutorials are currently correct in saying "Sheet Layers."

 

 

[E|FA]

I added a Wishlist item.  Please vote (up arrow at top left):

 

 

[Christiaan]

Yeap, agree with Andy, but this gets my vote. Layers and Sheets would be better.

[zoomer]

Classes, Levels and Layouts ... ?

 

Stories and Benchmarks ?

 

Building Materials and Render Materials ?

[rDesign]

But if this were implemented, would that mean that instead of the current two pull down menus:

A) “Classes”

B) “Sheet Layers and Design Layers”

 

now we would have three pull downs?

A) “Classes”

B) “Layers”

C) “Sheets”

 

To me that could be even more confusing from a UI/UX perspective. Not to mention the loss of usable screen real estate for other menu items. (Unless Vw were to borrow the AutoCAD UI approach with Sheet tabs at the bottom of the page, which is a potential nightmare if you use one BIM file with everything in it and have dozens of Sheets to navigate).

 

While I generally agree with the sentiments in this thread — personally I prefer to stick with the current approach. 

Edited January 10, 2023 by rDesign

[zoomer]

Maybe in 30 years no one can remember what a sheet was.

 

Look grand son, this a sheet of paper with plan drawings.

It is about as an Pad without touch but thinner and foldable ....

Edited January 10, 2023 by zoomer

[zoomer]

4 minutes ago, rDesign said:

now we would have three pull downs?

A) “Classes”

B) “Layers”

C) “Sheets”

 

 

I thought we already have (?)

 

Classes

Design Layers

Sheet Layers

[rDesign]

46 minutes ago, zoomer said:

 

 

I thought we already have (?)

 

Classes

Design Layers

Sheet Layers

 

I was meaning in the two current menu bar pull-downs with Classes (to the left) and combined Design Layers and Sheet Layers (to the right):

 

Design Layers and Sheet Layers currently make sense to be combined in one menu pull-down because they are both "Layers".

 

Following this request, if it becomes Sheets and Layers, to some users it might no longer make sense to combine them in one menu pull-down.

[zoomer]

58 minutes ago, rDesign said:

 

I was meaning in the two current menu bar pull-downs with Classes (to the left) and combined Design Layers and Sheet Layers (to the right):

 

 

Got it,

 

after posting I realized "dropdowns" and I knew got something wrong 🙂

Edited January 10, 2023 by zoomer

[Jeff Prince]

Here’s what I wrote in the other thread, with minor amendment….
 

Sheet

Design

Class

 

Do that and AutoCAD users will stop tripping over "layers" because we can succinctly say your AutoCAD "layer" = a Vectorworks "class" without confusion.

 

Build your model in a Design...

Classify the stuff you make by putting it on a class...

To make a drawing from this model, go to a sheet.

Create a viewport on that sheet which will act as a window into your Design...

add your notes to the viewport's annotations and they will move with the viewport if you adjust its position.

 

Just get rid of the word "Layer" entirely, it's soooo 2D sounding.

[Pat Stanford]

I don't think so. When you tell someone to look at Design First Floor vs Design Landscape, vs Design Roof-1, you are going to have even more confusion. 

 

Design does not work when you have something that needs the functionality of multiple Design Layers.

[Jeff Prince]

1 hour ago, Pat Stanford said:

I don't think so. When you tell someone to look at Design First Floor vs Design Landscape, vs Design Roof-1, you are going to have even more confusion. 

 

Design does not work when you have something that needs the functionality of multiple Design Layers.

What do you propose as an alternative?

 

I don’t see how Design is so different from Design Layer, other than “layer” causing confusion.

[Pat Stanford]

20 minutes ago, jeff prince said:

What do you propose as an alternative?

I don't have a good alternative, but switching from bad to bad just to be different is not a good solution.

 

Negative Nellie 101.

[Jeff Prince]

11 minutes ago, Pat Stanford said:

I don't have a good alternative, but switching from bad to bad just to be different is not a good solution.

 

Negative Nellie 101.

That is where our opinions differ.  The use of “layer” seems to throw a lot of people off, especially when moving from AutoCAD.  I’m used to it, heck almost all of us here are used to it.  However, when training others, that little word is like a curb set a few inches higher than normal… it trips everyone up 🙂

[Andy Broomell]

As soon as you have multiple, the word "Design" would be confusing. I can't imagine referring to different layers as different "designs." 

 

"Layers" or "Design Layers" is fine. Neither "Designs" nor "Design Spaces" match how they're actually used.

 

 

[E|FA]

I think the simplest and most minimal change is removing the word "Layers" from Sheets.  They are not really being layered in any way - Design Layers can be - and they are analogous to real world sheets in a drawing set.  This would reduce some confusion without adding new nomenclature.

Edited January 11, 2023 by E|FA

[Hamo]

On 1/10/2023 at 10:45 AM, twk said:

I agree, they are not layers, but to the point of referring to them in tutorials, at this point, it looks like they have to as they are called "Sheet Layers" in the actual drawing user interface.

 

Also, (nitpicking here 😄), sheets do not 'contain' layers, they can contain Viewports that contain layers, and classes.

 

 

But you're totally right, I only comment on this as I'm in the process of explaining the Vectorworks ecosystem to a Revit user currently on-boarding. The terminology should be changed to just "Sheets" on the drawing user interface.

 

 

You are correct.

[Hamo]

On 1/11/2023 at 4:34 AM, rDesign said:

But if this were implemented, would that mean that instead of the current two pull down menus:

A) “Classes”

B) “Sheet Layers and Design Layers”

 

now we would have three pull downs?

A) “Classes”

B) “Layers”

C) “Sheets”

 

To me that could be even more confusing from a UI/UX perspective. Not to mention the loss of usable screen real estate for other menu items. (Unless Vw were to borrow the AutoCAD UI approach with Sheet tabs at the bottom of the page, which is a potential nightmare if you use one BIM file with everything in it and have dozens of Sheets to navigate).

 

While I generally agree with the sentiments in this thread — personally I prefer to stick with the current approach. 

I might have missed the point you are making here, so apologies if I am.  do you mean like the image attached?

[rDesign]

1 hour ago, Hamo said:

I might have missed the point you are making here, so apologies if I am.  do you mean like the image attached?

No, not really. The screenshot I posted in THIS POST was of the two current menu pull-downs for ‘Classes’; and ‘Design and Sheet Layers’. What you posted was the Navigation palette (which is only included with Design series products, not Fundamentals).

My point was that if the requested change was made, then you would need to have three pull-down menus — whereas we currently only have two.

[E|FA]

43 minutes ago, rDesign said:

if the requested change was made, then you would need to have three pull-down menus — whereas we currently only have two.

So maybe we should also request an interface change for the pull down menu interface to accommodate tabs like the Navigation palette?

[Tom W.]

6 hours ago, rDesign said:

No, not really. The screenshot I posted in THIS POST was of the two current menu pull-downs for ‘Classes’; and ‘Design and Sheet Layers’. What you posted was the Navigation palette (which is only included with Design series products, not Fundamentals).

My point was that if the requested change was made, then you would need to have three pull-down menus — whereas we currently only have two.

 

But these drop-downs are telling you the active class + the active layer. You can only have one layer active at any one time whether it is a Design Layer or Sheet Layer, and this would still be the case if Sheet Layers were renamed 'Sheets'. I'm personally not fussed about whether a sheet is called a 'Sheet Layer' or a 'Sheet'. There is plenty of other idiosyncratic terminology in VW but you only have to learn it once, like any language. In my head + to others I refer to them as 'sheets' already. There are plenty of other things I'd rather VW focussed on improving/correcting...

[rDesign]

9 hours ago, Tom W. said:

There are plenty of other things I'd rather VW focussed on improving/correcting...

Don’t get me wrong, I am not in support in of the changes being discussed in this thread: I guess I’m not being clear in my posts about how I think this change would be for the worse. I’m saying that having three pull-downs is worse than having two.
 

I completely agree with you that this is not something I want Vw to spend any development time on: There are much larger issues to be corrected other than this.
 

Every software has it’s idiosyncrasies, this is just one of those that new users have to learn and accept.

Edited January 13, 2023 by rDesign

[Jeff Prince]

On 1/13/2023 at 9:16 AM, rDesign said:

Every software has it’s idiosyncrasies, this is just one of those that new users have to learn and accept.

 

I like to revisit my old thread subscriptions periodically and see how the conversation has evolved...

 

I wonder what how Vectorworks corporate is thinking about this.  As a business, they should want to gain market share.  As more people move towards a BIM workflow, you would expect the low hanging fruit to be converting AutoCAD users, at least that is the case in the Landscape Architecture world.

 

In my experience teaching firms and individuals how to move from AutoCAD to Vectorworks, the single biggest tripping hazard is this Layer nomenclature and UI.  People adapt to the UI faster than the Layer nomenclature, again... in my experience.  It probably has to do with hand/eye/muscle memory vs brain/language function.  Humans are good at pictures, not so good at arriving at a consensus on the intangible described by words, especially when the definition of words changes across programs and languages.  I didn't really think about this much until I started consulting internationally and began experiencing how different cultures and languages interact with software.  If you ever listen to business news in the technology space spoken in a foreign language, it is quite interesting how words from the West have no local equivalent and the "English" slips in 🙂. Now take that notion and apply it to basic functionality and confusion reigns supreme.

 

I am beginning to see more and more landscape architects adopting Revit and 3rd party companies addressing Revit's ignorance of the landscape industry with various add-ons.  This makes me sad for Vectorworks, which is the superior solution.  People who make decisions on big technology changes, such as switching software platforms for production within a design firm, are usually removed from the trenches.  We have to consider training, transition time, and the impact to our staff.  Smart decision makers will get a team to kick the tires on a new software and demonstrate some bells and whistles to get the excitement going.  Unfortunately, simple things like this whole Layer discussion has a way of turning off new people as the initial shock of change takes hold.  Those of us who are deep into our Vectorworks experience should not dismiss this reality and try to walk a mile in others shoes.  What we take for granted or second nature could be the very thing that is preventing people from learning.  Language matters.