Anuncios
Welcome to the Revit Ideas Board! Before posting, please read the helpful tips here. Thank you for your Ideas!
Comentario
Participant
Participant

There are N use cases for this feature. Revit should add this functionality regardless of community support to be frank. It is common sense.

Literally ALL Revit users' deliverables are somehow related to a scale. This functionality is imperative.

Yes, Revit scales nested Symbols/Detail Objects, however the limitation imposed by this workflow is, more often than not, impossible to circumnavigate without manual scale inputs to drive geometry.

Here is an example:

Give me a bar scale that adapts to the scale of the view it is placed on. This is a VERY common item in all drawing plans. The bar scale should always stay the same size, however the divisions and distance values need to adapt based on scale (ie, radio handles with visibility on/off driven by if statements). This is already clunky without the need to manually input the scale. We end up having a bar scale per view scale, and if one changes the view scale without manually updating the bar scale, everything on the drawing could be scaled wrong. It becomes a manual input prone to errors.

Another example:
Having a detail component break line (our family has SHS Break, Pipe Break and Standard Break as different types). All break line symbols should be the same size regardless of scale. Yes, this can be done with nested symbols in detail components, however, it is almost impossible to have this work flawlessly with a masking region with a nested symbol. We have to manually input view scale to drive the geometry in this case. Crazy.

There is a big detach between Revit in THEORY and Revit in PRACTICE which the developers are quite clearly not privy to. I understand you have a large team with rigid processes to gauge which updates should happen, however the developers are depending on literally a few dozen users to make big decisions. Our office alone has more users than is the average amount needed to get updates passed. If we were to ask our office to upvote every one of our ideas we would get every single idea passed, however, that is NOT how this should work. What percentage of the user-base is involved in this decision-making? Some of us are building incredible things using some of the most advanced Revit workflows, however many of the most fundamental basics are not accessible/available. How does that make any logical sense? 
"Having view scale available as a parameter / variable is imperative". I don't think any Revit user who actually uses Revit in practice will contest that statement.
@sasha.crotty 

PS. I am also a very well versed in Inventor, and there are MANY common/basic workflows possible in Inventor that are simply not available in Revit.

Finally, as a closing statement, the coding should be extremely basic for the feature we are suggesting. One simply converts the scale to a factor like in BricsCAD, THE END.