Jump to content
  • 1
Tom Klaber

Move Interior Elevation Tag without Moving Section Lines

Question

Currently, if you use the interior elevation tool - if you need to move the tag - it moves the section lines too, which is a real pain.  The tag should somehow be divorced from the tool.  Ideally, I would love to tag using the data-tag tool - only in the viewports I want - rather than having the tag.  The interior elevation tool should be like the space tool - where I draw a polygon that defines the space - then I can select which edges of the polygon I need interior elevations of.  Then the polygon can be tagged via the data tag tool in viewports.  

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

9 answers to this question

Recommended Posts

  • 0
On 10/16/2019 at 12:24 PM, Tom Klaber said:

Currently, if you use the interior elevation tool - if you need to move the tag - it moves the section lines too, which is a real pain.  The tag should somehow be divorced from the tool.

 

The tag should move independent from the section lines. Can you show me a reproducible case where this does not happen?

 

On 10/16/2019 at 12:24 PM, Tom Klaber said:

Ideally, I would love to tag using the data-tag tool - only in the viewports I want - rather than having the tag.

 

Yes, it certainly should not be tied to a design layer. Don't you think their visibility should work more like Section Lines where you can choose which viewports to display them in?  We also do need per view viewport control over the location and look of these object (like the Data Tag).

 

On 10/16/2019 at 12:24 PM, Tom Klaber said:

The interior elevation tool should be like the space tool - where I draw a polygon that defines the space - then I can select which edges of the polygon I need interior elevations of.  Then the polygon can be tagged via the data tag tool in viewports.  

 

Interesting idea!

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
 
 
 
 
2
41 minutes ago, Matt Panzer said:

 

The tag should move independent from the section lines. Can you show me a reproducible case where this does not happen?

 

 

Yes, it certainly should not be tied to a design layer. Don't you think their visibility should work more like Section Lines where you can choose which viewports to display them in?  We also do need per view viewport control over the location and look of these object (like the Data Tag).

 

 

I will try to reproduce.

 

I guess I would prefer the tags to act more like Room Tags then the section/elevation tags. It could take hours if you have 5 floors / 10 rooms per floor/ 4 elevations per room / 2 locations per tag = 400  "on switches" that you would have to switch to get the visibility right - then you would have to go to each viewport and adjust the location of the tag anyway.  So the same way that a room tag finds the space - the interior elevation tag could find its polygon.(Which could also be a space! - When you create a space - you then could select the edges of the space that you want to use to create the elevations.) - That way you simply place the tage where you want it.  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
On 10/18/2019 at 9:56 AM, Tom Klaber said:

I guess I would prefer the tags to act more like Room Tags then the section/elevation tags. It could take hours if you have 5 floors / 10 rooms per floor/ 4 elevations per room / 2 locations per tag = 400  "on switches" that you would have to switch to get the visibility right - then you would have to go to each viewport and adjust the location of the tag anyway.  So the same way that a room tag finds the space - the interior elevation tag could find its polygon.(Which could also be a space! - When you create a space - you then could select the edges of the space that you want to use to create the elevations.) - That way you simply place the tage where you want it.  

 

Putting your (very good) idea of using spaces to generate interior elevations aside: Would you agree that the main workflow problem is that interior elevations must be created from (and their markers placed on) a design layer? If you could create them by placing a marker in the viewport annotations directly, wouldn't that solve the majority of issues?

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
2 hours ago, Matt Panzer said:

 

Putting your (very good) idea of using spaces to generate interior elevations aside: Would you agree that the main workflow problem is that interior elevations must be created from (and their markers placed on) a design layer? If you could create them by placing a marker in the viewport annotations directly, wouldn't that solve the majority of issues?

 

I have no issue with the creation from a viewport. I have big issues with the tag, but actual the location of creation is less important.  Since they need to be tagged in several places (both in terms of multiple viewports and in relative plan location in those viewports), separating the tag from the act of creation seems critical.  The resulting workflow that this would create || make enlarge cropped plan viewports - place them on a sheet - then use those viewports to create the interior elevations - retag the 1/4" plans with the interior elevation data-tag || while sounds long - makes sense to me.  If I had to create the interior elevations in the plan and would have to simply tag the viewports - that would be a non-issue for me. 

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
38 minutes ago, Tom Klaber said:

I have no issue with the creation from a viewport. I have big issues with the tag, but actual the location of creation is less important.  Since they need to be tagged in several places (both in terms of multiple viewports and in relative plan location in those viewports), separating the tag from the act of creation seems critical.  The resulting workflow that this would create || make enlarge cropped plan viewports - place them on a sheet - then use those viewports to create the interior elevations - retag the 1/4" plans with the interior elevation data-tag || while sounds long - makes sense to me.  If I had to create the interior elevations in the plan and would have to simply tag the viewports - that would be a non-issue for me. 

 

I agree that it would be useful to place the markers in other viewports similar to the Data Tag would be useful, but that would mean that users would be required to use spaces into order to create interior elevations. While it sounds reasonable to me, it may not to others. However, I really like the idea and think it's something worth exploring!

 

The reason for my original question is because You can currently place a Section Line with the tool, then create a section viewport from it, then choose to show the Section Line in other viewports. If interior elevations worked in a similar manner it would, at least, be consistent. I'm not saying it'd be a perfect system - just better than what we have now.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
3 hours ago, Matt Panzer said:

 

I agree that it would be useful to place the markers in other viewports similar to the Data Tag would be useful, but that would mean that users would be required to use spaces into order to create interior elevations. While it sounds reasonable to me, it may not to others. However, I really like the idea and think it's something worth exploring!

 

The reason for my original question is because You can currently place a Section Line with the tool, then create a section viewport from it, then choose to show the Section Line in other viewports. If interior elevations worked in a similar manner it would, at least, be consistent. I'm not saying it'd be a perfect system - just better than what we have now.

I am all for consistency!

 

Yes for sure.  That would be OK.  The only practical difference is that section lines and elevations typically happen on the outside of the meat of the drawing.  The interior elevation tag is large and can easily cover other information - so not having the ability to adjust its relative location is currently an issue.  

It is one of the issues with the current section and elevation tags too - there are some plans where I would I like to adjust the location of the tag - but I can't - since they are all linked.  For example, we will have a larger ground floor - and the section line will be spaced for that larger floor -but then when we go to the upper floor - we can not adjust the tag to the size of the drawing - which can be a frustration.  

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

@Matt Panzer increasing consistency of similar tools (section marker / detail-callout marker / interior-elevation marker) would be a big step forward (lowering the learning curve on tools). Having similar object info & preferences visuals would also help.

 

Section Elevation Marker & Section Line are powerful tools, but rather confusing.

Menu > View > Create Section Viewport generates a Section Line (consistent)

Tools > Section-Elevation Marker generates either a Section-Elevation Marker (unconstrained mode) or a Section Line (constrained mode)

Either a simpler name given to the tool (Section Marker/Line) or separate tools/icons (Section Line Vs Section Marker) could make users life easier.  In some european localised versions "Tools > Section Maker" and "Menu > Section Line" are different paths towards different tools, and the overall concept is easier to understand. Either avoiding the use of the word "Elevation" or using it both in menu&tools would also help.

Higher consistency of the info/options provided in the Object Info and in the Preferences Dialogue would also help.

 

Detail-Callout Marker is also a powerful tool

But there is no way, if I am not mistaken, to generate a Detail Viewport from a button in the Object Info (as for Section Markers) or right-clicking.

Again, a simplified naming would also help (e.g. Detail Marker Vs Detail Crop?), and arranging options&info in a consistent way in the Object Info would be very helpful

The same goes for the Interior Elevation Marker and for the Reference Marker (which btw looks almost a legacy tool, maybe to be replaced by tags?)

 

Introducing Styles for all these tools would help a lot, instead of having a weird % scaling system unrelated from Library symbols real sizes. And last but not least, thinking about consistency... in Viewport > Advanced Viewport Properties... Markers sizes is only affected by "Text Scaling" and not by "Markers Scaling" as a user would expect to be (Markers Scaling seems to affect Dimensions markers only).

 

I find some of the latest tools introduced, among other the Data Tag and the Detail Level in Symbols, a huge step forward in terms of consistency, flexibility, and overall quality. Hope the same could happen for these tools!

Edited by STR
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0

@Tom Klaber, @STR, Thank you for laying out all of this. I put together a similar list awhile back and you both covered all the major points in that list! 🙂

 

Regarding the Marker Scaling for viewports: I believe it's by design that the setting only affects line markers (from dimensions, lines, arcs, etc). The dialogs and help text should better explain that.

Edited by Matt Panzer
clarification
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
  • 0
3 hours ago, Matt Panzer said:

@Tom Klaber, @STR, Thank you for laying out all of this. I put together a similar list awhile back and you both covered all the major points in that list! 🙂

 

Regarding the Marker Scaling for viewports: I believe it's by design that the setting only affects line markers (from dimensions, lines, arcs, etc). The dialogs and help text should better explain that.

Ultimately - and I could be alone - I prefer to simply place my elevation tag / Section Tag - and link it to a viewport rather than having the exact 1 to 1 relationship - again because sometimes - graphically, we need to adjust that tag - and currently we can not.  I am sooo into this new data tag system where the tags are reading information but still are their own objects.  I really think that is the best direction to go as far as all annotations. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Answer this question...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


 

7150 Riverwood Drive, Columbia, Maryland 21046, USA   |   Contact Us:   410-290-5114

 

© 2018 Vectorworks, Inc. All Rights Reserved. Vectorworks, Inc. is part of the Nemetschek Group.

×
×
  • Create New...