Plant/Tag ID

[NathanielH]

Hello,

 

Can the Plant/Tag ID be updated so it is case sensitive? This would improve the function of this feature and allow it to work with industry standards.

 

We create complex planting plans in the field of landscape architecture. An abbreviated letter code is used to identity plants. In order to keep these letter codes short and functional they are broken down and organized into three categories: (1)Trees, (2)Shrubs & (3)Herbaceous ("Perennials").

 

Letter case is used to organize plant symbols' letters so that overlapping conflicts are avoided:

• Trees use XX
• Shrubs use Xx
• Herbaceous plants use xx.

 

E.g. Platanus occidentalis & Physocarpus opulifolius when abbreviated to letter codes are PO & Po. When applying this letter code standard in Vectorworks it does not work.

 

This plant code formatting style is used in the field of landscape architecture and it is taught in university.

 

Thank you.

 

[Jeff Prince]

18 minutes ago, NathanielH said:

(case sensitive Plant ID tagging)This would improve the function of this feature and allow it to work with industry standards.

....

This plant code formatting style is used in the field of landscape architecture and it is taught in university.

This is not universal and is exclusive to your experience.

Means and methods vary around the world and from office to office.

Forcing users to do it this way is not a good idea.

Edited April 24, 2023 by jeff prince

[Amanda McDermott]

I agree that it's not universal, but also that it would be useful if the Plant tag could be case sensitive.

[NathanielH]

On 4/24/2023 at 11:50 AM, jeff prince said:

This is not universal and is exclusive to your experience.

Means and methods vary around the world and from office to office.

Forcing users to do it this way is not a good idea.

Hi Jeff.

 

Okay. Can you please elaborate on how adding case sensitivity is a form of control.

 

And yes, the world is a diverse place. Many things are not universal. Are restrictive settings flexible and accommodating?

 

I'm failing to see why adding case sensitivity to enable landscape/planting designers to produce better planting plans is a problem.

 

Nathaniel

[Jeff Prince]

@NathanielH Both the Planting and Data Tag tools allow you to use whatever case you wish already.

 

My issue is with how all of your posts thus far claim "industry or university standards and practice", for which they simply are not.  I voice my concern about these misrepresentations so others do not start to believe what you are proclaiming.  Or even worse, a Vectorworks employee takes what you say for gospel and inadvertently screws up one of our tools.

 

So let's talk about something productive... How are you unable to get the plant id to report how you like.  Perhaps there is an opportunity to educate you on the use of the tools rather than have you requesting they be changed.

[Phillip Tripp]

I have been creating plans for 27 years across dozens of universities in NE and SE USA and have yet to encounter a forced standard for plant key abbreviations.  With hundreds of plants on a project, we quickly run out of 2 letter keys within the same plant category and have to be creative, especially with multiple cultivars of the same species on the same project.

For Platanus occidentalis & Physocarpus opulifolius, we would do PLA OCC & PHY OPU, to help our staff more easily identify a plant during the middle of a presentation or construction visit without searching a lengthy schedule to decipher.  The slightly longer abbreviation helps avoid the chances of duplicate plant keys.  6 letters vs 20+ letters in the plant tag still feels like a win.  But like Jeff said, to each their own.

 

I too worry more about implying a standard that isn't practical for everyone.  Plenty of those already.

[NathanielH]

I'm currently working on a large project with many thousands of plants distributed naturalistically. Long letter codes overlap and are not practical due to legibility. I agree, it would be clearer if each plant had a longer code. This would work well for conventional block planting. Using short letter code abbreviations is the most functional option in my situation. Adding a case sensitive feature is not restrictive, it is enabling.

Edited April 26, 2023 by NathanielH

[Jeff Prince]

1 hour ago, NathanielH said:

Adding a case sensitive feature is not restrictive, it is enabling.

 

It already exists in the software.  Perhaps you should explain why it's not working for you.

[NathanielH]

Hi Jeff,

 

When creating an ID code that uses the same letters but with different case letters, Vectorworks provides the following error message "A recourse with that name already exists!" See attached image.

 

If this field detected case letters and realized this is not the same text, there would be more options available. Currently, the only option is to use more or different letters.

 

Nathaniel

 

 

[Jeff Prince]

1 hour ago, NathanielH said:

Hi Jeff,

 

When creating an ID code that uses the same letters but with different case letters, Vectorworks provides the following error message "A recourse with that name already exists!" See attached image.

 

If this field detected case letters and realized this is not the same text, there would be more options available. Currently, the only option is to use more or different letters.

 

Nathaniel

 

Now that is a good example of the issue you were trying to describe.

Things in Vectorworks must have unique names, hence the problem and one you are unlikely to get changed... it's fundamental to how the program operates apparently (not unique to plant ids).  Some people hate this feature, personally I like it because it alerts me to potential issues and force me to  follow my naming convention instead of getting lazy.

 

A way to get around this fundamental....

Using Records for a plant id instead of the Plant Object's built in Plant ID feature.

This will allow you to have duplicate values and mixed case without issue.

Attached is an example with data tags.  The circular one is customized to report the Plant ID from a Record instead of the the Plant Object.

The other two are default VWX data tags.  Of course you would have to add a custom record to your plants for this to work, but it solves your problem.

 

632805014_PLANTIDEXAMPLE.vwx

Edited April 27, 2023 by jeff prince

[Peter W Flint]

4 hours ago, NathanielH said:

I'm currently working on a large project with many thousands of plants distributed naturalistically. Long letter codes overlap and are not practical due to legibility.

Without seeing a drawing, this sounds like an inefficient use of the tools available, and I’m not sure anyone professionally is even laying out large matrix plantings according to a precisely written plan. I would break up a volume of plant mixes this size into landscape areas so you can get your orders right and your placements close, then tweak the final layout on day of installation.

 

On 4/24/2023 at 1:34 PM, NathanielH said:

This plant code formatting style is used in the field of landscape architecture and it is taught in university.

FWIW, it’s not been that long since I was in a university getting my MLA degree and I’ve never heard of the formatting convention cited here. 

[unearthed]

1000's of planted planted exact locations - but look naturalistic?? Very, very, very expensive to plant (and contractor willhate you and refuse to work for you again) just label blocks with:

• species ratio

• spacing guidance

• 'pattern' / arrangement - but keep rules simple

Discuss with your planting people i.e. actual dialogue as they almost certainly know more than you do (I learn all the time from my plant teams), and then walk away and leave them to it. I do plantings from the 100's to 100, 000+ like this, and site works to D9 gear using same approach.

[Peter W Flint]

Only folks I know of who might be attempting something like this would be the Suffolk crowd or someone executing an Oudolf project and these usually rely heavily on seed for the underlying structure layer. Specific interest plants are represented with a simple symbol notated on a legend, not with with callouts or data tags. Again, even in these projects the final layout occurs on site. 

[NathanielH]

3 hours ago, jeff prince said:

 

Now that is a good example of the issue you were trying to describe.

Things in Vectorworks must have unique names, hence the problem and one you are unlikely to get changed... it's fundamental to how the program operates apparently (not unique to plant ids).  Some people hate this feature, personally I like it because it alerts me to potential issues and force me to  follow my naming convention instead of getting lazy.

 

A way to get around this fundamental....

Using Records for a plant id instead of the Plant Object's built in Plant ID feature.

This will allow you to have duplicate values and mixed case without issue.

Attached is an example with data tags.  The circular one is customized to report the Plant ID from a Record instead of the the Plant Object.

The other two are default VWX data tags.  Of course you would have to add a custom record to your plants for this to work, but it solves your problem.

 

632805014_PLANTIDEXAMPLE.vwx

Hi Jeff,

 

Thank you for explaining the limitations of the plant/tag ID. If only case sensitive text was available.

 

Alternative tagging as you have shown above may be an option but I suspect it will not work for us. Unfortunately I can not show you an example of the project at hand as it is government related and it is strictly confidential.

 

Can the labeling style you have shown above be automated (part of the plant symbol) and not include leader lines? How quickly can this be done if each plant requires a label and there are thousands of them?

 

I understand how to label groupings, etc. This will not work for our current project as it is large -- many tens of acres. More specifically, we require a label for each tree so it is clear what they are and precisely where they go. There are thousands of trees to label and the density is high. Leader lines may work for some grouped plants but when designing a biodiverse, naturalistic forest, it is not practical to use leader lines. Leader lines are also quite cumbersome and time consuming to position for when our masterplan is cut down into its tiles and enlargements.

 

Also, can these alternative labels export to AutoCAD and be easily controlled from there? I assume they end up on their own layers based on their assigned VW classes.

 

Thanks.

 

Nathaniel

[NathanielH]

1 hour ago, Peter W Flint said:

Without seeing a drawing, this sounds like an inefficient use of the tools available, and I’m not sure anyone professionally is even laying out large matrix plantings according to a precisely written plan. I would break up a volume of plant mixes this size into landscape areas so you can get your orders right and your placements close, then tweak the final layout on day of installation.

 

FWIW, it’s not been that long since I was in a university getting my MLA degree and I’ve never heard of the formatting convention cited here. 

Hi Peter,

 

Unfortunately I can not show you the project.

 

As far as I am aware, matrix planting is a specific ground cover planting design style brought to the fore by Piet Oudolf. We not working primarily with mixed herbaceous vegetation at a garden scale so we can not list the plants as part of a mix, etc.

 

Our naturalistic planting design project is large and involves many trees. When working with trees and other design elements they have to be positioned precisely. E.g. you would not want a contractor to randomly place trees on top of utilities that needs to be removed. This also has to be worked out in advance during the design process. Furthermore, underground utilities and other structures are challenging to locate on site and a drawing is required in advance of any on site work.

 

And the plant code format which is taught at the university I attended was likely due to the instructors' need for it within the profession. I assume your instructors did not need this function.

 

Nathaniel

[NathanielH]

2 hours ago, unearthed said:

1000's of planted planted exact locations - but look naturalistic?? Very, very, very expensive to plant (and contractor willhate you and refuse to work for you again) just label blocks with:

• species ratio

• spacing guidance

• 'pattern' / arrangement - but keep rules simple

Discuss with your planting people i.e. actual dialogue as they almost certainly know more than you do (I learn all the time from my plant teams), and then walk away and leave them to it. I do plantings from the 100's to 100, 000+ like this, and site works to D9 gear using same approach.

Hi,

 

Yes, this is an expensive project. 

 

The contractors will indeed need to be experienced and serious. Due to the length of the construction phase, the scale of the project and the client, it is not possible to speak with those who will be doing the planting at this time.

 

I agree that plantings need to be simple but this is also relative to site scale, the type and size of plant being located and the design intent.

 

The designers will certainly be monitoring and guiding planting. I am also a skilled planting designer and gardener with a professional background in horticulture and I am very much aware of complex onsite planting realities.

 

Nathaniel

[Jeff Prince]

44 minutes ago, NathanielH said:

Hi Jeff,

 

Thank you for explaining the limitations of the plant/tag ID. If only case sensitive text was available.

 

Alternative tagging as you have shown above may be an option but I suspect it will not work for us. Unfortunately I can not show you an example of the project at hand as it is government related and it is strictly confidential.

 

Can the labeling style you have shown above be automated (part of the plant symbol) and not include leader lines? How quickly can this be done if each plant requires a label and there are thousands of them?

 

I understand how to label groupings, etc. This will not work for our current project as it is large -- many tens of acres. More specifically, we require a label for each tree so it is clear what they are and precisely where they go. There are thousands of trees to label and the density is high. Leader lines may work for some grouped plants but when designing a biodiverse, naturalistic forest, it is not practical to use leader lines. Leader lines are also quite cumbersome and time consuming to position for when our masterplan is cut down into its tiles and enlargements.

 

Also, can these alternative labels export to AutoCAD and be easily controlled from there? I assume they end up on their own layers based on their assigned VW classes.

 

Thanks.

 

Nathaniel

 

you can format the data tags to suit your graphic needs within VWX and they will export to AutoCAD.  You can also automatically tag 1000s of plants automatically.  Assigning the record and populating it with the desired data and formats probably needs to done with a script to be efficient if you are doing this after the plants have been placed.  If starting a project, it can be done while developing the plant list.

[Peter W Flint]

It still feels like what you are trying to achieve is feasible with the tools available, whether its separating out your information over a series of sheets and VPs, or leveraging some of the more advanced functionality Jeff is referring to. Obviously without an example it is difficult to help. There are lots of ways to reproduce an example without disclosing confidential information: screenshots of drawing areas with layer/class visibility adjusted to hide confidential data, c/p layers without geometry into a new drawing, drawing a simple box with the problem in a new file and applying all the elements necessary in a way unrelated to the project.

 

I'm unsure how to classify your current approach to asking for help but it doesn't seem to be working.