Empty window tag in model

[Chris Clymer]

I'm experiencing an issue with window ID Tags. 

I'm in the process of creating a window schedule.  When working on the model in the design layer and I click on a window, both boxes are checked in the OIP under ID Tag (Include on Schedule and Show Tag in 2D), but a few window ID tags appear empty.  There is no obvious difference between a window with an empty ID Tag, vs a window with one that is filled.  I've read several threads where this occurs in the viewport, but their fix does not apply as my issue occurs is in the actual model.  

Things I've tried with no effect...

* Changing window to unstyled

* Changed classes

*  Unchecked and rechecked boxes

*  Closed Vectorworks and restarted program

 

I'd appreciate any ideas anyone may have!

Chris 

 

[shorter]

Have you tried using a data tag instead of the integrated tag?

[Chris Clymer]

Yes... and that does work in that it overrides the issue.  I was really hoping to solve the main issue and avoid a two-step process.  I've been using Vectorworks 'professionally' for less than a year and when I do hit a dead end, the culprit is usually a setting somewhere that I'm missing.  But maybe I'm just not using the tags correctly?  I'm also learning that the program is not free of bugs.  Thanks very much for your help!

[shorter]

Data Tags may be two-step but are far superior to the integrated tag.

 

You can, for example, place multiple tags at once and auto-number the windows.

 

You can put the tags on a separate design layer, which helps to overcome the problem of 'annotation conflict'.

 

Tags can also pick up [almost] anything in the door or window way beyond the data found within the door or window data.

[E|FA]

My understanding is that VW is moving away from integrated tags (Doors, Windows, Spaces) to Data Tags.  You can still use either, but the Data Tags are a better long term workflow.  

 

VW definitely has its quirks (and bugs).  There are other Legacy features and tools that still work despite new options, and not all are marked as such.  It's confusing when you're trying to do something new or are a new user, but helpful dealing with older projects & files, and old habits.

[shorter]

As @E|FA suggests, use tags in place of integrated tags and they are also, or tend to be, much faster.  Space Tags especially.  Get above 100 spaces and it really slows down with space labels.

 

Tags are also really easy to make yourself, and you can tag nearly everything once you can work out where the data lives.

 

The only frustrating thing is the incremental numbering.  It works on a 'first-come-first-placed' method, so if you do not place doors and windows in a specific order (and let's face it, who does?), the numbering goes a bit crazy.

 

The other thing I don't like about tags (integrated or otherwise) and the BIM methodology generally compared to how we used to tag doors, is that should you delete a door, the tag goes with it, so you can't record why the door number was retired or the door omitted, e.g. for VE.  There should be a way to retire a door via a 'phase' that removes it from the wall, but leaves it in the schedule.

Edited February 10, 2023 by shorter

[E|FA]

@shorter Sounds like you have this all lined up to add a Wishlist item, unless one already exists.

[shorter]

It's on my list of things to wish for, yes.  We should see this incorporated into the software in about 12 years, if class filters is anything to go by... 😉

[Tom W.]

14 hours ago, shorter said:

There should be a way to retire a door via a 'phase' that removes it from the wall, but leaves it in the schedule.

 

Can this not be done by class? I mean 'remove' the door by turning that class off rather than actually deleting it.

[shorter]

9 hours ago, Tom W. said:

 

Can this not be done by class? I mean 'remove' the door by turning that class off rather than actually deleting it.

It still creates a hole in the wall if you just turn the class off, doesn’t it?

 

the door would have to be dragged out of the wall first, so yes, I suppose a class would do it but it’s not quite what I had in mind.

 

it’s more that we need a record of the door but not the door itself to remain in the file.

[Pat Stanford]

Complete off the top of my head guess here.  What about Use Symbol Geometry but have a symbol that is only a single locus point?

 

Untried and untested.

[Jeff Prince]

37 minutes ago, shorter said:

It still creates a hole in the wall if you just turn the class off, doesn’t it?

 

the door would have to be dragged out of the wall first, so yes, I suppose a class would do it but it’s not quite what I had in mind.

 

it’s more that we need a record of the door but not the door itself to remain in the file.

 

A potential solution...

You can cut a Door or Window out of a wall and paste it onto a Retired Design layer.  This gives you the ability to report it to your schedule AND have your wall behave properly with the former opening healed.  The only potential down side comes into play on multistory buildings and how you prefer to manage Design Layers and/or Stories.

[Tom W.]

8 hours ago, shorter said:

It still creates a hole in the wall if you just turn the class off, doesn’t it?

 

Yes. I then fill this with a bit of 'proposed' Wall. But this is what I want, because I can then produce existing + proposed drawings from the same model by controlling the visibility of 'existing', 'demolished' + 'proposed' Wall + Door classes. But I accept that this isn't what you want: you only want a record of the Door in the schedule, you don't want a representation of it in the model.

[shorter]

All workarounds are just that, and generally workarounds take more time, and usually involve 3-4x more steps to achieve the same thing.

 

We need to come up with a script that does some of these things, without the need to create additional layers or classes unless created on the fly by the scripts.

 

Phases are above classes.  Layers is close but a phase is more like meta data.  The door in the door class, is on the ground floor layer.  It is not longer active in terms of geometry but present in terms of data.

[shorter]

ps  Apologies to @Chris Clymer I have hijacked your post!

[Chris Clymer]

Thank you all for the help on this... much appreciated!  Data Tags it is!  

[Chris Clymer]

@shorterNo worries at all!  An interesting tangent, and a question I would have likely come to the forum with in time.